FO: NV

[Gromnir]

am not a big fan o' eye and groin being returned to fo. as we noted, those targetable areas got some rationale for the hand-to-hand and melee folks, but otherwise they not make much sense. heck, it would be neato to give close-range fighters an opportunity to aim for knees and inside o' foot while we is at it, but is not always the case that more options is better. would rather see current vats system tweaked without adding complexity.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Slowtrain]

am not a big fan o' eye and groin being returned to fo. as we noted, those targetable areas got some rationale for the hand-to-hand and melee folks, but otherwise they not make much sense. heck, it would be neato to give close-range fighters an opportunity to aim for knees and inside o' foot while we is at it, but is not always the case that more options is better. would rather see current vats system tweaked without adding complexity.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

I'd like to see the whole VATS thing removed.

 

WHy the heck do you need it for in a first person action game anyway? Just make all your targets have location specific damage, and if you manage to shoot someone in the groin in real time combat, then great, location specific damage + criticals + whatever extra effects you want.

 

FO3 needs to embrace its first person action game nature; not try to hide from it.

[Malcador]

Well it could work without VATS, put in reticule spread like DX or R6 and your skill affects how quickly it contracts after aim-shifting, spreads during bursts of fire (likewise, sway when using a scope). I'm not expecting VATS to disappear, wouldn't be a huge crisis if it were to.

[Kjarista]

am not a big fan o' eye and groin being returned to fo. as we noted, those targetable areas got some rationale for the hand-to-hand and melee folks, but otherwise they not make much sense. heck, it would be neato to give close-range fighters an opportunity to aim for knees and inside o' foot while we is at it, but is not always the case that more options is better. would rather see current vats system tweaked without adding complexity.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

I'd like to see the whole VATS thing removed.

 

WHy the heck do you need it for in a first person action game anyway? Just make all your targets have location specific damage, and if you manage to shoot someone in the groin in real time combat, then great, location specific damage + criticals + whatever extra effects you want.

 

FO3 needs to embrace its first person action game nature; not try to hide from it.

 

There were a lot of people complaining that they didn't want real time combat because they thought that such a system would have player skill trump character skill. Some folks even argued that they couldn't play shooters. I find FO3 to require minimal physical skill, as do most people, I think.

[Pop]

I don't really expect anything included in Fallout 3 to be removed for F:NV. People are calling for integral aspects of combat to be removed because, ostensibly, they sucked, but there's no indication of how the absence of things like VATS will actually make the game more enjoyable. There's a difference between changing something to one-up your predecessors and changing something to better the game. It should probably be stressed that Obsidz is not going to overhaul F3 for NV (unless they use Onyx instead of Gamebryo, which would be a screwball on top of the curveball that is this game existing in the first place) it's not going to be isometric, it's not going to be turn-based, it's going to use VATS. It doesn't make sense to subtract features and add new ones when you can cut out half the work and just add features. It's how Obsidz has worked before.

[CoM_Solaufein]

There is nothing wrong with VATS. Don't like it, don't use it. Simple. Unbalanced or overpowered items, skills or whatever? Don't use them. A lot of us power gamers enjoy such things.

 

Need to focus on more important things like smart AI, better leveling, tag along characters, a main story that really matters, dialog options/choices.

[Slowtrain]

Ibut there's no indication of how the absence of things like VATS will actually make the game more enjoyable.

 

That's true. Too much change brings a lot of uncertainty.

 

 

However, I do think removing or minimizing the slomo would be welcomed by many and would probabkly make the game more playable.

[Kjarista]

I don't really expect anything included in Fallout 3 to be removed for F:NV. People are calling for integral aspects of combat to be removed because, ostensibly, they sucked, but there's no indication of how the absence of things like VATS will actually make the game more enjoyable. There's a difference between changing something to one-up your predecessors and changing something to better the game. It should probably be stressed that Obsidz is not going to overhaul F3 for NV (unless they use Onyx instead of Gamebryo, which would be a screwball on top of the curveball that is this game existing in the first place) it's not going to be isometric, it's not going to be turn-based, it's going to use VATS. It doesn't make sense to subtract features and add new ones when you can cut out half the work and just add features. It's how Obsidz has worked before.

 

I think that's right. We can hope for improvements in dialogue and story, perhaps better sets of choices and consequences, but I agree that it's not likely that any of the major systems are going to change much.

[Slowtrain]

There is nothing wrong with VATS. Don't like it, don't use it. Simple. Unbalanced or overpowered items, skills or whatever? Don't use them. A lot of us power gamers enjoy such things.

 

 

The only problem with that relates to what Pop mentioned briefly earlier. It is hard to balance the game for both RT combat and for VATS. WHat works well in one area, works not so well in another. And what you end up with is two competing systems, neither of which really works.

 

If the game was actually dedictated to VATS-only combat and a lot of effort was put into making VATS-only combat balanced and enjoyable and interesting, it would probably be pretty fun.

[Kjarista]

There is nothing wrong with VATS. Don't like it, don't use it. Simple. Unbalanced or overpowered items, skills or whatever? Don't use them. A lot of us power gamers enjoy such things.

 

 

The only problem with that relates to what Pop mentioned briefly earlier. It is hard to balance the game for both RT combat and for VATS. WHat works well in one area, works not so well in another. And what you end up with is two competing systems, neither of which really works.

 

If the game was actually dedictated to VATS-only combat and a lot of effort was put into making VATS-only combat balanced and enjoyable and interesting, it would probably be pretty fun.

 

The gam, to me anyway, seems that it is balanced for non VATS combat. Using VATS makes the game much easier. Since I don't much care for VATS, I like it that way, but tastes differ.

[Slowtrain]

There is nothing wrong with VATS. Don't like it, don't use it. Simple. Unbalanced or overpowered items, skills or whatever? Don't use them. A lot of us power gamers enjoy such things.

 

 

The only problem with that relates to what Pop mentioned briefly earlier. It is hard to balance the game for both RT combat and for VATS. WHat works well in one area, works not so well in another. And what you end up with is two competing systems, neither of which really works.

 

If the game was actually dedictated to VATS-only combat and a lot of effort was put into making VATS-only combat balanced and enjoyable and interesting, it would probably be pretty fun.

 

The gam, to me anyway, seems that it is balanced for non VATS combat. Using VATS makes the game much easier. Since I don't much care for VATS, I like it that way, but tastes differ.

 

 

TO me it seems the opposite. In the sense that it is SO much harder in RT than in VATS, that I can't help but think it was balanced for VATS.

 

 

I remember the first time I attacked Evergreen Mills. I was playing a melee only character and never used VATS. As I recall I burned close to 200 stimpacks and a whackload of medx taking that place out. It seemed....excessive.

 

 

I was just glad I had that many stimpacsk to burn.

 

If there hadn't been a Behemoth there, I wouldn't have burned nearly so many though. Tring to fight a behemoth and 10 or so raiders in rt melee is a bit nuts.

[entrerix]

stimpacks to me are even more unbalanced than vats. at least until they start making it a heal over time mechanic or cost ap to use

 

I made a mod where my stimpacks only heal 1/4 of what they originally did, to reduce my ability to heal midfight. (simply because I have to use more of them and this actually makes them seem a bit rare)

 

the only way my character really heals then is by water fountains or sinks, which cause rads, and I'm using a mod where rads are more dangerous and radaway is less effective.

 

makes the game a lot more fun for me, reminds me a bit of stalker

 

i should probably switch them to a heal over time mod too

Edited May 15, 2009 by entrerix

[GreasyDogMeat]

I think Cronicler has the best idea about VATS slo-mo. Add a slider in the options menu for how often, if at all, VATS goes into slo-mo. Crit hits only, all the time, never, etc.

 

Another thing I wouldn't mind seeing is the damage you receive in VATS being increased. As it is, you take only about 10% of the damage you normally would while in VATS mode. I tried a mod that made you take 100% and it made the game MUCH more challenging. It wouldn't necessarily have to be 100%, but some sort of increase could reduce the 'cheatiness' of VATS. There could even be some new perks related to VATS reducing the damage you take in the mode.

 

I also remember reading somewhere that Bethesda had considered preventing APs from regenerating during combat, so if you used VATS to take out one of many enemies in the vacinity, you wouldn't be able to regen until you left the area or finished off the others in the area.

 

Wouldn't it be crazy if your enemies could go into VATS mode on YOU?

 

@CrashGirl: You should try sneaking in with a stealth boy and shooting the generator to the Behemoth's cage then watch in the shadows as he gets revenge for his captivity.

Edited May 16, 2009 by GreasyDogMeat

[Bos_hybrid]

Anyone that thinks this game is going to be anything more then FO3 in a different setting is not thinking realistically. Sure the story, dialogue and NPCs can/should be improved, but thats it, game mechanics will remain the same. Now if Obsidian was maiking Fallout 4, well that would be a different story.

[GreasyDogMeat]

Luckily for me, I'm pretty much fine with that.

 

We already have two examples with KotOR 2 and NwN 2 and while you wouldn't be fooled that these were sequels to the originals, they both featured some interesting tweaks and additions.

[Bos_hybrid]

We already have two examples with KotOR 2 and NwN 2 and while you wouldn't be fooled that these were sequels to the originals, they both featured some interesting tweaks and additions.

 

Both were sequels, a more appropriate example would be comparing NWN2 to MOTB.

[Pop]

There is nothing wrong with VATS. Don't like it, don't use it. Simple. Unbalanced or overpowered items, skills or whatever? Don't use them. A lot of us power gamers enjoy such things.

 

Need to focus on more important things like smart AI, better leveling, tag along characters, a main story that really matters, dialog options/choices.

VATS is functional, but it presents clear balance issues that have been beaten into the ground by now. Design flaws are flaws whether or not you choose to put yourself in a position to encounter them or not. Developers ought to care about them, or at least, treat flaws that make a game needlessly easy in the same manner with which they treat flaws that make a game needlessly frustrating. VATS combat was fun but it could've been a lot better if it presented more of a challenge. The purpose of VATS seemed to be the minimizing of challenge.

 

We already have two examples with KotOR 2 and NwN 2 and while you wouldn't be fooled that these were sequels to the originals, they both featured some interesting tweaks and additions.

 

Both were sequels, a more appropriate example would be comparing NWN2 to MOTB.

I wouldn't say that just yet. KOTOR2 was in effect KOTOR1 with a lot of bells and whistles added, bells and whistles that can easily be replicated for F:NV. In particular a more in-depth, perhaps skill-based crafting system, and improvements to combat strategy. I don't think Obsidz is going to settle for just making a glorified expansion - as has been pointed before, Fallout 2 was made in roughly the same time frame as F:NV, and it was fairly expansive. I wouldn't underestimate Obsidz, especially if the bulk of the company is going to be brought to bear on NV as soon as Alpha Protocol wraps.

Edited May 16, 2009 by Pop

[Nightshape]

Ibut there's no indication of how the absence of things like VATS will actually make the game more enjoyable.

 

That's true. Too much change brings a lot of uncertainty.

 

 

However, I do think removing or minimizing the slomo would be welcomed by many and would probabkly make the game more playable.

 

I'd say make it optional, removing features seems stupid. I don't mind it at all, but ya know, I don't carry the same amount of venom around in my belly as you when it comes to a feature like VATS, I just hate the way that it sometimes looks lame when you aim a minigun at someones head at point blank range, and not only do you miss, you can see how they've forced the bullets to miss...

[Nightshape]

Anyone that thinks this game is going to be anything more then FO3 in a different setting is not thinking realistically. Sure the story, dialogue and NPCs can/should be improved, but thats it, game mechanics will remain the same. Now if Obsidian was maiking Fallout 4, well that would be a different story.

 

I think there is some scope for rule tweaking, but nothing more than that really, I don't expect HUGE changes, heck I'm not certain if I expect small ones. All I can say is FIX THE ANIMATION! I suggest starting with a decent character rig!

[cronicler]

Let me clarify this; I don't advocate the removal of game mechanics from the game. I or You or anyone thinking about them as useless, overpowered, a must, etc is fine but removing something means loss of work time.

 

What I would like to see is a detailed "game play options page" where you can arrange how game mechanics work. Allow the player to adjust his combat difficulty, social difficulty, Vats options, Immortal or Mortal Companions by his choice and you have a game that can satisfy both extreme ends of the spectrum. Heck allow a Wimp mode to play the game with +4 all stats and +40 all skills for experimenting with stuff and such. Give the player some choice instead of railroading the whole game on a single track. (game Mechanics Wise)

Edited May 16, 2009 by cronicler

[Killian Kalthorne]

That would up the difficulty on the difficulty bar that is for sure.

[Atreides]

Suggestion: Have smarter/well armed units like a military unit throw grenades off the walls into corners where retreating players tend to camp with a shotgun ready.

[Bos_hybrid]

I wouldn't say that just yet. KOTOR2 was in effect KOTOR1 with a lot of bells and whistles added, bells and whistles that can easily be replicated for F:NV. In particular a more in-depth, perhaps skill-based crafting system, and improvements to combat strategy. I don't think Obsidz is going to settle for just making a glorified expansion - as has been pointed before, Fallout 2 was made in roughly the same time frame as F:NV, and it was fairly expansive. I wouldn't underestimate Obsidz, especially if the bulk of the company is going to be brought to bear on NV as soon as Alpha Protocol wraps.

 

Not underestimating, thinking realistically. Level raise? Perhaps. Improved crafting? Maybe. Removal of VATS? No. Changing from real time to turned based? No. There will be minor adjustments/improvements to the game, just nothing game changing. As for settling for a 'glorified expansion', that is exactly what F:NV will be and there is nothing wrong with that. This won't be Van Bruen no matter how many wish it would be.

[cronicler]

You need to remember that there are "glorified" expansions and then there are truly good expansions.

I gave been advocating the belief that the basic game play mechanics which have been carried over from previous titles and the new gimmicks provide a good but extremely unpolished, in other worlds raw base for thew game. Most of the suggestions that you see here are not about adding completely new things (like my wish for BiA squad controls or ME party orders) but about refining the in game things (Vats, Stats and Skills, Weapons, Crafts, Economy and so on)

 

For example, We don't need to cram 50 levels into the game if you give the player to "learn" some perks that allows him to do some special actions like "opening electronic locks as well as normal locks" "skinning hunted wildlife" and so on.

 

Personally I would favor a White Wolf like XP system over the usual XP based level systems to be honest, But the game code about special is NOT suited for this so it would take too much time and balancing. On the other hand a Detailed crafting system is actually "purely cosmetic" and "interface based" as far as the game code is concerned so it wouldn't be too far fetched to see an improvement there.

Edited May 16, 2009 by cronicler

[CoM_Solaufein]

Have level 40-50 as the maximum or just dumb down the EXPs you get for quests and kills. I hated maxing out in Fallout 3 and not even be half way through the game yet.

 

Get some bloody good voice talent, people who can at least alter their voices to sound like someone else. The generic voices of Fallout 3 was tiring and better to be left unvoiced if I'm going to hear the same person a lot of the time.