FO: NV

[Oner]

Three Dog called you the lone wanderer over the radio all the time.

He called me Little Miss 101.

[Purkake]

No, in every game divisible by 3 you play as The Prisoner

 

FO6 confirmed?

 

(I know, I know Van Buren...)

[entrerix]

ahh so that must be one of those things I missed by always turning off the radio anytime 3 dog started talking.

[entrerix]

OOH A NEW IDEA: there should be an easter egg type quest/encounter where you run into death in the desert looking for the next king of vegas, if you have a guitar you can challenge him to a duel.

 

(this is straight ripoff of stuff from six string samurai, but since this game actually takes place in vegas it really fits)

[bhlaab]

I wasn't kidding when I said there should be a food item called Chef Boyarsky

[entrerix]

I'd like to find mention somewhere of what ever happened to the hubologists.

 

maybe have a descendent of them tell the story or something as a little fun side bit. I guess we know what happened to harold, so he's officially out of the series...

 

I wonder if we will see the return of AP v JHP ammo.

 

I also would love to have plasma rifles and laser weapons look like they did in the originals

 

same as combat shotgun.

 

I figure it's a given, but I think many people really like the idea of a dog companion in these games. so we need one of those. but I think we should be able to name it whatever we want.

 

So I can name him dogmeat 3.

[bhlaab]

I'd like to find mention somewhere of what ever happened to the hubologists.

 

maybe have a descendent of them tell the story or something as a little fun side bit. I guess we know what happened to harold, so he's officially out of the series...

 

If you download the restoration patch, it adds 3 endings for the Hubologists. They all die in each one (in different ways for each ending. If you steal their fuel they use an alternative that blows up the shuttle when they try to take off)

 

I wonder if we will see the return of AP v JHP ammo.

 

If they do, I hope AP ammo will actually function

[jjc]

In all three Fallout games there is only one way to end the game in a manner that will start the epilogue--the "victory" condition. A chain of events must be followed leading up to this. In Fallout, for example, you can shift the events on the chain around a little to suit your taste (choose to do the Cathedral first or the Base first.) The basic idea of a checklist of events leading towards victory is the same as the old games, but the chain is much longer in Fallout 3, and more resistant to tampering.

 

In Fallout and Fallout 2, there was a continuity to the way the player could expect to interact with the world. Progression through time and space were dependent on the movements and actions of the player, and this was maintained whether on a basic "kill gang members" quest or a plot-critical one.

 

A major difference in Fallout 3, regarding story quests, is its reliance on heavily scripted sequences: Tranquility Lane, being captured and taken to Raven Rock, assault by Liberty Prime, etc. Once they are initiated, the player is "locked in" to these scenarios and cannot leave without satisfying their criteria. These are sealed bubbles of activity that exist entirely outside of time and space, as time and space can be understood by their presentation in the free-roaming action that constitutes most of the game's content. Raven Rock is a place, but it is not a place in the sense that Rivet City is a place. You cannot elect to go to Raven Rock, even if you explore the map and find its entrance. The interior of Raven Rock only exists during the time you are summoned there by the plot. Similarly, because exit from Raven Rock is barred until the quest is complete, you cannot elect to go anywhere else in the world while you are inside that scenario.

 

What a player can expect a "quest" to be is therefore redefined: in Fallout or Fallout 2, a quest is an objective to be accomplished within and according to the rules of one continuous game world. In Fallout 3, a quest may entail the player's sudden transport to a discrete scenario which is separate from the larger world and may disregard the established rules of that world entirely.

 

Bethesda do this to accommodate aesthetic or narrative choices: they desired a sequence where the player was kidnapped and forced to escape from the enemy's stronghold, a sequence where a giant robot battles the enemy, etc. The consequence of accommodating these choices is the restriction of the player's ability to interfere with scripted scenarios playing out as planned. The result is the sense that the game world's battling factions are driving the narrative, not the player. This could be ameliorated by tweaks to existing scenarios: let the player opt to evade capture and storm through Raven Rock's front door: same enemies, same location, same offer from the supercomputer; let the player control the giant robot. It's a step towards negating the dissonance between the free-roaming world and the confines of the plot. (This dissonance is common to most games that attempt free-roaming on this scale, from The Elder Scrolls to Grand Theft Auto.)

 

I want to emphasize that even "just a step" towards the mainstream adoption of designs that accommodate a range of player choice in an interactive narrative is encouraging. From this weird apocalypse that's led everyone towards XBOX development have come successful games like Oblivion, Mass Effect, and Fallout 3: these are exposing fundamental ideas of the western CRPG to an audience who would never have put up with western CRPGs before. Don't forget the volume of writing that was produced in awe of the fact that you could get a different ending in Bioshock depending on your conduct: this was perceived by some as a radical idea.

 

Alpha Protocol will appear to be a progression from ideas familiar to the mainstream because of Mass Effect. If it is successful, if it is seen, then the audience is able to compare the ideas in both games; now they understand more than one perspective on design. Similarly, one of the most productive functions of New Vegas will be demonstrating to everyone who bought Fallout 3 that an alternate approach to the material exists and is viable. The audience has to understand what is possible before they can make judgments on what kind of design they prefer.

[entrerix]

great post. Too bad we have to wait for the masses to catch up to design ideas that have existed on the pc for years

[Kefeinzel]

So basically what you're saying is since the hypothetical grammar school class is filled with retarded kids, so they can't grasp long division, and the class should regress to learning to count the numbers 1 through 3 in the proper sequence and the kids that are interested in learning the long division should just tolerate the counting until the class of retards catches up.

Gotcha.

Also, when the retards learn simple addition we can hail it as 'a grand step towards eventually learning division'.

WTB a developer courageous enough to buck the mainstream.

Edited June 22, 2009 by Kefeinzel

[bhlaab]

Hold on, now. This isn't some console people are dumb thing. I mean, look at Chrono Trigger. While it was a linear game, being a JRPG, it played wildly with the idea of multiple endings and changing game-world states.

The hype about Bioshock wasn't that there were two different endings, it was that it was presenting something as dark as killing a child as a choice in the game. The moral choice is something that's definitely new to consoles, and I've gotta say developers are doing an awful job of upholding the ideal with their binary, oftentimes ridiculous choices that affect incredibly little.

 

I think that what really affects newer RPGs' nonlinearity and quality of design is the following:

-Full voice acting means that all dialogue needs to be locked down incredibly early

-Current design trends favor a "less is more" approach meaning hardcore elements are stripped out and/or dumbed down in favor of accessibility and the appearance that the game is 'sleeker'

-Black Isle was an incredibly talented studio and... I won't name names, but a lot of modern devs just... aren't.

[TwinkieGorilla]

Too bad we have the masses

 

i just quoted the important part.

[entrerix]

you know hitler thought the same thing. You don't want to be like hitler. No one likes him.

 

 

 

edit: is joke - no one derail thread onto hitler popularity

Edited June 23, 2009 by entrerix

[Aristes]

hahaha

 

Sorry, on topic: hahaha

 

Now for more story info... if we haven't pissed off the devs too much.

[TwinkieGorilla]

i was joking too.

 

 

(lie)

[Tagaziel]

Now for more story info... if we haven't pissed off the devs too much.

 

People arguing about the game they develop is never wrong.

[Dark_Raven]

I heard there was another Fallout game and Obs was doing it. All I have to say is don't screw it up. Don't get rushed into doing it like you guys did with Kotor2 and don't bore the fans like you did with NWN2.

[TwinkieGorilla]

I heard there was another Fallout game and Obs was doing it.

 

errr...way to be on the ball there, kiddo.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

Hey, a lack of internet access will do that to someone.

[Kasabian]

I hope an updated construction set is also included. *hint*

 

I love Fallout, Bethesda did well, but it is good to see it back in the hands of those that know it best.

 

Oh, the topic is about the story. :D Make the plot decisions/directions morally ambiguous, their is not much grey in Bethesdas game.

[Morgoth]

Sorry to wade just into this discussion, but has it been confirmed whether F:NV will use the F3 engine, or will it use Obsidian's own Onyx engine?

[Rosbjerg]

Sorry to wade just into this discussion, but has it been confirmed whether F:NV will use the F3 engine, or will it use Obsidian's own Onyx engine?

 

I think we can assume that it'll use the F3 engine, as an expansion in a different engine would be very unusual..

[Morgoth]

Sorry to wade just into this discussion, but has it been confirmed whether F:NV will use the F3 engine, or will it use Obsidian's own Onyx engine?

 

I think we can assume that it'll use the F3 engine, as an expansion in a different engine would be very unusual..

Sort of Stalker --> Stalker: Clear Sky expansion.

 

In that case, yes, it makes sense.

[Gromnir]

great post. Too bad we have to wait for the masses to catch up to design ideas that have existed on the pc for years

 

you think it were a great post?

 

"These are sealed bubbles of activity that exist entirely outside of time and space, as time and space can be understood by their presentation in the free-roaming action that constitutes most of the game's content."

 

Carl Sagan died in 1996... just in case somebody didn't read the obituary. stopped reading the "great post" at this point. if there were greatness after this point we is unaware, but surely there weren't any such quality previous.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Rosbjerg]

Sorry to wade just into this discussion, but has it been confirmed whether F:NV will use the F3 engine, or will it use Obsidian's own Onyx engine?

 

I think we can assume that it'll use the F3 engine, as an expansion in a different engine would be very unusual..

Sort of Stalker --> Stalker: Clear Sky expansion.

 

In that case, yes, it makes sense.

 

Wasn't that "just" an upgraded version of the engine? and if so, all the data and programming could be transfered without much of a fuss.. I'm not sure that the whole system of Fallout 3 could so easily be transfered from the Gamebryo to Onyx, at least not in the timeframe given.