Obsidian making Fallout: New Vegas

[Killian Kalthorne]

Bethesda is fine. they can do what they want. but the day Obsidian makes a game like Bethesda i'm turning around and walking the other way.

 

Fine with me. I rather Obsidian make games that sell than have Obsidian make one or two more games then die as a company.

[Aristes]

I don't think games need to be easy these days. With a reload button, most hard games aren't really that hard anyhow.

 

...And much of the greater difficulty of the earlier Fallout games stemmed from the broken crit table and such. I mean, I don't know which is worse, that you can take a critical hit to the eyes for no damage, or that you can take a critical hit to the groin for three times your current health. In the same battle. Don't want to be 'consoled' though. haha

 

Seriously, making the combat a little harder probably wouldn't be all that bad, but I'm leery of some of the suggested changes for things like stimpacks. I find it particularly strange that some folks think the game has become more 'consolized' because of things like the stimpack use when stimpacks were so easy to exploit in the first two games.

[Slowtrain]

As for the Witcher, there was a potion that immediately restored an amount of health, but this was balanced by the fact that the toxicity of the potion was very high.

 

I thought the toxicity mechanic was pretty effective in the WItcher. Sure you could heal yourself nad give yourself all sorts of abilities, but you always had to balance that with your toxicity level.

 

 

Plus of course, you actually drank the potions in real time, while the combat was happening around you. WHich add another wrinkle to the potion quaffing.

[Aristes]

Yeah, but is anyone suggesting that the Witcher is harder than Fallout 3? 'Cause I've played both and it seems to me that the Witcher isn't exactly a real toughie.

 

Weren't they 'consolizing' the Witcher? Too bad that went under. I was hoping to test whether my current game of Witcher would suddenly suck because they managed to 'consolize' it. haha

 

I don't mind the idea of changes. I just don't want remedies that suck worse than the disease, so to speak. ...And, of course, I enjoyed Fallout 3, so I'm not going gonzo over changing stuff. On the other hand, as long as it works in the long run, I'll be happy.

[Niten_Ryu]

I don't think games need to be easy these days. With a reload button, most hard games aren't really that hard anyhow.

 

Unfortunately that is not true for the many casual players. Even with the help of save/load, they get frustrated fast if they can't beat some encounter that's too difficult for 'em. They'll quit the game and won't even try to finish it. Thus they don't recommend game to their friends (nor buy the possible sequel) and that'll lead to lost sales.

[Slowtrain]

Yeah, but is anyone suggesting that the Witcher is harder than Fallout 3? 'Cause I've played both and it seems to me that the Witcher isn't exactly a real toughie.

 

 

The Witcher had one or two tough fights, such as the Beast at the end of chapter 1, but no it wasn't a hard game either.

 

Wasn't my point that the Witcher was harder or easier than FO3, rather I was merely commenting on different balancing mechanics for the use of healing items.

[bhlaab]

Bethesda is fine. they can do what they want. but the day Obsidian makes a game like Bethesda i'm turning around and walking the other way.

 

Fine with me. I rather Obsidian make games that sell than have Obsidian make one or two more games then die as a company.

 

If they're compromising themselves, then they're already dead.

[Amentep]

"Consolized"? Did the franchize need much consoling? What was it bereft of?

 

stfu wise-ass

 

Ooo, snap! Its wikitionary!

 

In other news, I wouldn't be against something being done for healing to make it a bit more sensible in future Fallout games. I like the idea of a heal over time angle to it.

[TwinkieGorilla]

the attitude of complacency for compromising one's integrity is depressing and symptomatic of the decline of the medium in general. remember when Tim Cain was told FO won't get GOTY because it's too good and Tim says (paraphrasing) "I hope not. I hope the worth of a game isn't determined by the amount of copies sold." if people continue compromising and fans like Killian keep saying "that's ok as long as you stay afloat as a company" then we're going to revert back to Pong much sooner than you all think.

 

Ooo, snap! Its wikitionary!

 

the point was to say "hey, i didn't invent the word. don't look at me, Homer."

[Slowtrain]

There are quite a few ways that healing item use can be balanced:

 

1) Limit the availability of healing items in the world

2) Limit the number of healing items a player can carry at any given time

3) Limit access to healing items during combat

4) Limit the amount of healing that can be consumed at any given interval

 

I'm sure there are many others.

 

FO3 took almost the same approach as Fallout 1 and 2 in that once you are in your inventory you can do as much as you like. The big difference of course is that in FO1/2 TB combat, accessing inventory had an AP cost.

 

edit: Vs say JAg 2 which has no AP cost to enter inventory (though you stil have to wait for your turn), but each discreet inventory action does have an AP cost.

Edited May 11, 2009 by CrashGirl

[Killian Kalthorne]

Then when Pong retrurns we will have gone full circle and the process can start again!

 

Thus it is the Great Circle of Gaming.

[TwinkieGorilla]

Then when Pong retrurns we will have gone full circle and the process can start again!

 

Thus it is the Great Circle of Gaming.

 

i have a feeling we'll look like those people in Wall-E for a long, long time before anything starts again.

[Gorgon]

The potions in the witcher worked rather well IMHO. Otherwise pretty simplistic combat though. Press mouse button 1 four times for the most advanced maneuver...

[Niten_Ryu]

the attitude of complacency for compromising one's integrity is depressing and symptomatic of the decline of the medium in general. remember when Tim Cain was told FO won't get GOTY because it's too good and Tim says (paraphrasing) "I hope not. I hope the worth of a game isn't determined by the amount of copies sold."

 

And where is Tim Cain ? Developing some unknown MMOG at Carbine Studios after Troika crashed and burned. NCsoft ain't doing that well either nowadays and if Timmy still follows his mantra, it's bye bye for the Carbine Studies and possible for NCsoft too.

[TwinkieGorilla]

And where is Tim Cain ? Developing some unknown MMOG at Carbine Studios after Troika crashed and burned. NCsoft ain't doing that well either nowadays and if Timmy still follows his mantra, it's bye bye for the Carbine Studies and possible for NCsoft too.

 

yeah well. i'd rather leave behind a legend than a pile of money.

[Amentep]

the attitude of complacency for compromising one's integrity is depressing and symptomatic of the decline of the medium in general. remember when Tim Cain was told FO won't get GOTY because it's too good and Tim says (paraphrasing) "I hope not. I hope the worth of a game isn't determined by the amount of copies sold." if people continue compromising and fans like Killian keep saying "that's ok as long as you stay afloat as a company" then we're going to revert back to Pong much sooner than you all think.

 

I do agree with your sentiment, but I think the issue will always be what is a compromise to the integrity.

 

That said, I don't think having a restriction to healing would effect casual gamers; I've played a lot of console games (since games in that market seem to be, for the purposes of this discussion, the realm of the casual gamer) that either didn't allow or limited healing in combat situations. In fact I seem to think most action RPGs on consoles used healing over time as their method of operation, but my memory may just be off (it does cheat, you know). I seem to remember the Champions of Norrath games and the Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance games using healing over time, for example.

 

Ooo, snap! Its wikitionary!

 

the point was to say "hey, i didn't invent the word. don't look at me, Homer."

 

Yeah I know you didn't invent the word; I was trying for wit and only got half-way there. My apologies.

[Killian Kalthorne]

yeah well. i'd rather leave behind a legend than a pile of money.

 

I rather have a pile of money. Money pays the bills, pays for rent/mortgage, and buys food. You can be a legend all you want, Twink. I think I rather have a roof over my head.

[TwinkieGorilla]

I do agree with your sentiment, but I think the issue will always be what is a compromise to the integrity.

 

sure. art that leaves your mind is always going to be compromised. that said, i don't think we need to keep seeing games lose their complexity. i wonder...maybe i'm wrong, but if a modern-looking game which played like FO1 came out today i can't imagine it flopping. that said, if Bethesda put just a little more time into SPECIAL, dialogue, C&C, and some old-skool cRPG-tweaking like the little stuff we talk about here (inventory costing AP) i can't see that flopping.

 

Yeah I know you didn't invent the word; I was trying for wit and only got half-way there. My apologies.

 

lulz.

 

I rather have a pile of money.

 

yes, i've got a pretty good understanding of your Utopian vision by now.

[Aram]

This conversation makes me laugh.

[Llyranor]

Given that most if not all CRPGs in the past 5 yrs have all had horrible combat systems, consolization might not actually be a bad thing, since those demonspawn machines actually get RPGs with turn-based tactical combat on a semi-regular basis.

Edited May 11, 2009 by Llyranor

[Killian Kalthorne]

yes, i've got a pretty good understanding of your Utopian vision by now.

 

Utopian? Fah.

 

I am talking about being realistic here. The purpose of a company is to make money. The way a company to make money is to make products people want to buy and use. A company that doesn't make products that people want to buy and use is a company that doesn't stay in business. It fails. Basic business management 101 here, Twink. People like you tend to forget that companies like Bethesda and Obsidian aren't charities govern by our whims. They are businesses. Businesses that have obligations to creditors, employees, and the like. If they don't make games that sell, they are dead. Just like Troika. Is that what you reaslly want? If so, then you are the one trying to live in an Utopia that will never be.

[Llyranor]

As far as celestial bodies go, Hades is his own utopia.

[Amentep]

sure. art that leaves your mind is always going to be compromised. that said, i don't think we need to keep seeing games lose their complexity. i wonder...maybe i'm wrong, but if a modern-looking game which played like FO1 came out today i can't imagine it flopping. that said, if Bethesda put just a little more time into SPECIAL, dialogue, C&C, and some old-skool cRPG-tweaking like the little stuff we talk about here (inventory costing AP) i can't see that flopping.

 

Yeah I don't see it flopping either, but I think gamers in general and console gamers in specific aren't necessarily against certain design decisions that add a degree of complexity to a game.

 

things like inventory costing AP (although I'm unsure in FO3 how that would work with the real time combat) or the healing over time to mitigate stimpak use (which yeah I admit to abusing, but still...) shouldn't be deal breakers in a game, I'd think.

[Killian Kalthorne]

As far as celestial bodies go, Hades is his own utopia.

 

Speaking of which, I have a Gold membership now.

[TwinkieGorilla]

yes, i've got a pretty good understanding of your Utopian vision by now.

 

Utopian? Fah.

 

I am talking about being realistic here. The purpose of a company is to make money. The way a company to make money is to make products people want to buy and use. A company that doesn't make products that people want to buy and use is a company that doesn't stay in business. It fails. Basic business management 101 here, Twink. People like you tend to forget that companies like Bethesda and Obsidian aren't charities govern by our whims. They are businesses. Businesses that have obligations to creditors, employees, and the like. If they don't make games that sell, they are dead. Just like Troika. Is that what you reaslly want? If so, then you are the one trying to live in an Utopia that will never be.

 

ok. drop this damn business, moving product, and making money bit. i'm sick of this argument. it's b.s. my point is this below:

 

sure. art that leaves your mind is always going to be compromised. that said, i don't think we need to keep seeing games lose their complexity. i wonder...maybe i'm wrong, but if a modern-looking game which played like FO1 came out today i can't imagine it flopping. that said, if Bethesda put just a little more time into SPECIAL, dialogue, C&C, and some old-skool cRPG-tweaking like the little stuff we talk about here (inventory costing AP) i can't see that flopping.

 

Yeah I don't see it flopping either, but I think gamers in general and console gamers in specific aren't necessarily against certain design decisions that add a degree of complexity to a game.

 

things like inventory costing AP (although I'm unsure in FO3 how that would work with the real time combat) or the healing over time to mitigate stimpak use (which yeah I admit to abusing, but still...) shouldn't be deal breakers in a game, I'd think.

 

right. which is why Killian's post earlier today caught me off guard. the strawman of "something is better than nothing" and "be happy with what you're given" makes me want to smack heads together.