Fallout: New Vegas

[Walsingham]

What about editions of National Geographic? Or somesuch? Nothing says 1950s to me like National Geographic. Or if you insist on being fuuuutuuuure it could be something like Intriguing Tales!

[Guest Slinky]

- Something like Bobbleheads will be in New Vegas as well and it will boost players stats. What it will be exactly isn't known yet.

Meh. I'd prefer stat increases through dialog/quests instead, like in FO1&2. Hopefully they are at least more like memory chips than bobbleheads.

 

you mean like the books and memory modules? Oh, wait...

You read the book and learn. You use the memory module to get a brain surgery and "learn". You find a small toy and put in in your pocket and.. eh.. learn? I see a difference.

[WorstUsernameEver]

- Something like Bobbleheads will be in New Vegas as well and it will boost players stats. What it will be exactly isn't known yet.

Meh. I'd prefer stat increases through dialog/quests instead, like in FO1&2. Hopefully they are at least more like memory chips than bobbleheads.

 

you mean like the books and memory modules? Oh, wait...

You read the book and learn. You use the memory module to get a brain surgery and "learn". You find a small toy and put in in your pocket and.. eh.. learn? I see a difference.

 

Gameplay-wise it's the same thing though.

[Guest Slinky]

- Something like Bobbleheads will be in New Vegas as well and it will boost players stats. What it will be exactly isn't known yet.

Meh. I'd prefer stat increases through dialog/quests instead, like in FO1&2. Hopefully they are at least more like memory chips than bobbleheads.

 

you mean like the books and memory modules? Oh, wait...

You read the book and learn. You use the memory module to get a brain surgery and "learn". You find a small toy and put in in your pocket and.. eh.. learn? I see a difference.

 

Gameplay-wise it's the same thing though.

To me that means the player could then just as well be able to fly magically through the air instead of walking, since it's gameplay-wise the same thing, both ways get you from point A to B

 

But that's just me, always demanding at least some sense in games.

[WorstUsernameEver]

- Something like Bobbleheads will be in New Vegas as well and it will boost players stats. What it will be exactly isn't known yet.

Meh. I'd prefer stat increases through dialog/quests instead, like in FO1&2. Hopefully they are at least more like memory chips than bobbleheads.

 

you mean like the books and memory modules? Oh, wait...

You read the book and learn. You use the memory module to get a brain surgery and "learn". You find a small toy and put in in your pocket and.. eh.. learn? I see a difference.

 

Gameplay-wise it's the same thing though.

To me that means the player could then just as well be able to fly magically through the air instead of walking, since it's gameplay-wise the same thing, both ways get you from point A to B

 

But that's just me, always demanding at least some sense in games.

 

Let's review what happened:

- a preview mentioned the presence of item that raise special stats, like bobbleheads;

- you critiqued this aspect of the game;

- someone made you notice there were similar items in the previous Fallouts;

- you replied that at least they made sense in-setting;

 

.... notice something here? Yeah, that's right, you don't know what they'll be in Vegas. Could very well be something different for every stat.

[Guest Slinky]

.... notice something here? Yeah, that's right, you don't know what they'll be in Vegas. Could very well be something different for every stat.

Since when that has stopped anyone in here

 

Anyway I was criticizing more bubbleheads than anything else.

[Mikhailian]

- The small and big weapons skills are merged into one weapon skill.

This bothered me at first, but I'm guessing that Special is being made more important to your effectiveness with weapons, instead of just lifting your baseline competency. Hopefully Sawyer can weigh in at some point

[WorstUsernameEver]

I hope they reintroduced strength requirements for weapons too, I think it would complement the system rather well.

[Spider]

Most people who complain about the bobbleheads are more like "Stat-boosting items in FO3? How lame." Mostly the complain about them being munchkinny and stuff like that. Hence my response. Your critique is more valid, but I still disagree. I think the bobbleheads as a game mechanic are excellent (a substantial reward for exploration) and they make sense in the over-the-top Fallout-world. The bobbleheads themselves, not the stat-boosting effect. That's just there to reward the player, which I'm fine with.

 

To be honest, I think they're a better fit than the memory modules in FO2. I think FO2 took the science fiction aspect of the game a bit too far at times. It's supposed to be silly, campy 50's sci fi, not melodramatic, dystopian 80's sci fi, where cybernetics and such was a main theme. I don't mind them terribly, because as a gameplay reward for thorough players they're fun.

[Mikhailian]

I hope they reintroduced strength requirements for weapons too, I think it would complement the system rather well.

Strength requirements for big guns, perception for small guns, perhaps intelligence for energy? I'd go for something like that. The merge wouldn't even bother me if something like that occured. So long as overall we don't winde up with an even less balanced skill system and level cap.

I know they've said the game will go up to thirty, but that won't really be a problem if we get fewer points and more skills to dump them into.

Edited May 23, 2010 by Mikhailian

[WorstUsernameEver]

I hope they reintroduced strength requirements for weapons too, I think it would complement the system rather well.

Strength requirements for big guns, perception for small guns, perhaps intelligence for energy? I'd go for something like that. The merge wouldn't even bother me if something like that occured. So long as overall we don't winde up with an even less balanced skill system and level cap.

I know they've said the game will go up to thirty, but that won't really be a problem if we get fewer points and more skills to dump them into.

 

Strength for all weapons would suffice with heavy weapons being wielded by only particularly strong characters you'd eliminate the problem of sneak characters the occasionally pull out a mingun and clear off a room full of heavily armed Nightkin.

Energy weapons is still separated from Firearms, and I personally don't think that small arms need a requirement at all.

I really doubt that the Obsidian team can pull off a system even less balanced than Fallout 3 anyway.

[Mikhailian]

I hope they reintroduced strength requirements for weapons too, I think it would complement the system rather well.

Strength requirements for big guns, perception for small guns, perhaps intelligence for energy? I'd go for something like that. The merge wouldn't even bother me if something like that occured. So long as overall we don't winde up with an even less balanced skill system and level cap.

I know they've said the game will go up to thirty, but that won't really be a problem if we get fewer points and more skills to dump them into.

 

Strength for all weapons would suffice with heavy weapons being wielded by only particularly strong characters you'd eliminate the problem of sneak characters the occasionally pull out a mingun and clear off a room full of heavily armed Nightkin.

Energy weapons is still separated from Firearms, and I personally don't think that small arms need a requirement at all.

I really doubt that the Obsidian team can pull off a system even less balanced than Fallout 3 anyway.

To be clear, I'm not thinking of the requirements as hard thresholds for use, I'm thinking of them as tiered consequences, introducing things like increasingly severe gun sway or increased critical failure rate.

 

[edit]: After thinking about it for a minute, I like your idea more than mine.

Edited May 23, 2010 by Mikhailian

[Slowtrain]

Most people who complain about the bobbleheads are more like "Stat-boosting items in FO3? How lame." Mostly the complain about them being munchkinny and stuff like that. Hence my response. Your critique is more valid, but I still disagree. I think the bobbleheads as a game mechanic are excellent (a substantial reward for exploration) and they make sense in the over-the-top Fallout-world. The bobbleheads themselves, not the stat-boosting effect. That's just there to reward the player, which I'm fine with.

 

To be honest, I think they're a better fit than the memory modules in FO2. I think FO2 took the science fiction aspect of the game a bit too far at times. It's supposed to be silly, campy 50's sci fi, not melodramatic, dystopian 80's sci fi, where cybernetics and such was a main theme. I don't mind them terribly, because as a gameplay reward for thorough players they're fun.

 

 

I think the Bobble heads and their stat-raising effects are fine. The biggest problem with the stat/skill system in FO3 was the huge number of skill points available within the game. I personally don't think there should be enough skill points in a game to allow a player to come close to maxing out more than a handful of skills.

 

It's one of he reasons I would prefer a return to the tag skill methodology of FO1/2. Make the Tags provide a bigger bonus for the skills you want to base your character around and then greatly reduce the skill points in the game. In that scenario the choices you make for tag skills have a more more pronounced impact.

 

Which I like.

[Spider]

I agree completely. The amount of skill points available was just silly.

[Slowtrain]

I made a 1 int character and disallowed taking any perks that directly gave skill points. I took the perk that doubled skill points from books so findign and reading books was theh only way of adding skill points beyond the most basic 1 int score level allotment.

 

I STILL had my character almost fully developed by around level 12. Part of that of course is becuase I feklt some skills were totally useless, like speech and barter, and didn't develop them at all.

 

 

I really doubt that the Obsidian team can pull off a system even less balanced than Fallout 3 anyway.

 

 

lol.

 

I agree.

 

I think all the info on the changes fo NV is pretty positive and it's more of an overhaul than I expected.

 

I like the idea of pointing explosive weapons in the Explosives skill while adding the remaining big guns into the firearms skill. I'm a little concerned about energy weapons remaing a seperate skill, but I think Josh is too aware of things to let the skill get uber. I would like to see the orbital nukerblaster move to the science skill, which makes far and away the most sense and provides some extra reason for having science as a high skill. but I don't expect that to happen.

 

I'm actually surprised that Beth has been OK with so many fairly significant changes to the gameplay. I give them credit for giving Obs the freedom to make so many changes.

[WorstUsernameEver]

I'm actually surprised that Beth has been OK with so many fairly significant changes to the gameplay. I give them credit for giving Obs the freedom to make so many changes.

 

I'm actually wondering if Beth will keep some of these changes in Fallout 4 or if they will overhaul the skill system once again.

Too soon to think about that probably, but whatever.

[Slowtrain]

I'm actually surprised that Beth has been OK with so many fairly significant changes to the gameplay. I give them credit for giving Obs the freedom to make so many changes.

 

I'm actually wondering if Beth will keep some of these changes in Fallout 4 or if they will overhaul the skill system once again.

Too soon to think about that probably, but whatever.

 

 

My guess would be that it entirely depends on how Obs changes are recieved and how the game sells. Bethesda, to their credit, always listens to what people say about their games, gameplay-wise, and tends to make changes in whatever direction they think will make people happy (and sell more games of couse).

 

If the changes are considered successful, I think Beth won't hesitate to move Fallout 4 in the same direction Obsidian takes NV.

[Gromnir]

Most people who complain about the bobbleheads are more like "Stat-boosting items in FO3? How lame." Mostly the complain about them being munchkinny and stuff like that. Hence my response. Your critique is more valid, but I still disagree. I think the bobbleheads as a game mechanic are excellent (a substantial reward for exploration) and they make sense in the over-the-top Fallout-world. The bobbleheads themselves, not the stat-boosting effect. That's just there to reward the player, which I'm fine with.

 

To be honest, I think they're a better fit than the memory modules in FO2. I think FO2 took the science fiction aspect of the game a bit too far at times. It's supposed to be silly, campy 50's sci fi, not melodramatic, dystopian 80's sci fi, where cybernetics and such was a main theme. I don't mind them terribly, because as a gameplay reward for thorough players they're fun.

 

 

I think the Bobble heads and their stat-raising effects are fine. The biggest problem with the stat/skill system in FO3 was the huge number of skill points available within the game. I personally don't think there should be enough skill points in a game to allow a player to come close to maxing out more than a handful of skills.

 

 

 

 

our problems with fo3 skills were legion... but will limit to but a couple key points for the nonce.

 

fo3 skills point availability and awards were relative straightforward and simple, which is a Good thing. unfortunately, it were rather easy for a player to become proficient in every skill due to availability o' exp and the seeming minimal proficiency threshold for most combat related skills. didn't need 100 in a combat skill to be extreme proficient... so problem of excessive points were actual worse than some suggest.

 

1) am hopeful that obsidian fixed combat mechanics so that there is a genuine reason for adding points into a combat skill beyond some minimal threshold value.

 

we never figured out the exact numbers, but it frequent seemed as if there were hardly any genuine advantage to raising a combat skill beyond 45 or 50%... which is stoopid. am hopeful that obsidian fixed so that adding skill points to a combat skill beyond minimum thresholds is actually meaningful to gameplay.

 

2) am hopeful that 100 points won't get you 100%

 

typically, we is opposed to unnecessary complications of da rulez. nevertheless, we thinks that there shoulds be a mechanic for promoting skill choice diversity as well as specialization. unlike previous fo games, fo3's cap at 100 makes sense, but am not thinking you needs have 100 skill points equal 100% in a skill. if it actual takes 50 points to get from 90 to 100 in a skill, then perhaps a player will consider the advantages o' diversification over specialization, no? developers and testers may decide to play with the numbers a bit, but increasing skill point costs at 50, 75, 85, and 90 might be worthy o' consideration... at the very least, such a progression will chew up loads o' exp. 'course, in returning to our first point, there must needs be a genuine reward to makes such costs worthy o' consideration.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Slowtrain]

fo3 skills point availability and awards were relative straightforward and simple, which is a Good thing. unfortunately, it were rather easy for a player to become proficient in every skill due to availability o' exp and the seeming minimal proficiency threshold for most combat related skills. didn't need 100 in a combat skill to be extreme proficient... so problem of excessive points were actual worse than some suggest.

 

I agree, and this has been a problem with Bethesda crpgs since MW. It is so easy to raise and max your skills and skills seem to have a less than profound impact on the game (MW was the exception here; MW skills levels had an impact. Said impact was much reduced in Oblivion) that, for me, it really makes the whole charcter development aspect of their crpgs much less interesting. Like others here, I think FO3's strengths were the exploration/atmosphere of the game, not the crpg aspects.

 

The over-abundancr of skill points in FO3 was a bit nuts. Bethesda can get some slack for that maybe since this has been their first crpg to use XP/skill points vs their traditonal learn-by-doing approach. Perhaps they simply over-estimated on the skill points.

 

1) am hopeful that obsidian fixed combat mechanics so that there is a genuine reason for adding points into a combat skill beyond some minimal threshold value.

 

we never figured out the exact numbers, but it frequent seemed as if there were hardly any genuine advantage to raising a combat skill beyond 45 or 50%... which is stoopid. am hopeful that obsidian fixed so that adding skill points to a combat skill beyond minimum thresholds is actually meaningful to gameplay.

 

Also agree. The impact of combat skills seemed to be very downplayed in FO3. Once a character had 50% there was never much reason to push a combat skill higher. I remember the first time I really pushed my small guns skill with a character and was quite disappointed how little effect there seemed to be from going from 50-100%. Was there some effect? Sure. But it could have been a lot more impressive. I also felt that characters with a very low combat skill weren't bad enough at it. I had plenty of small guns charcters who were still reasonbly effective at very low levels, when, more interesting would have been to have them lucky not to shoot themselves in the foot. Critical failures would have been fun, perhaps.

 

Given how easy it was to raise skills in FO3, there is really no reason that they should not have had considerably more impact on the gameplay.

 

 

2) am hopeful that 100 points won't get you 100%

 

typically, we is opposed to unnecessary complications of da rulez. nevertheless, we thinks that there shoulds be a mechanic for promoting skill choice diversity as well as specialization. unlike previous fo games, fo3's cap at 100 makes sense, but am not thinking you needs have 100 skill points equal 100% in a skill. if it actual takes 50 points to get from 90 to 100 in a skill, then perhaps a player will consider the advantages o' diversification over specialization, no? developers and testers may decide to play with the numbers a bit, but increasing skill point costs at 50, 75, 85, and 90 might be worthy o' consideration... at the very least, such a progression will chew up loads o' exp. 'course, in returning to our first point, there must needs be a genuine reward to makes such costs worthy o' consideration.

 

 

Yep, I think that would be a nice addition as well. The same effect can also be achieved to some degree, in a more simple fashion, simply by severely limiting the amount of skill points in the game and increasing the impact of skills. Ideally, a player wouldn't have enough skill points to do everything well and, since skills had impact, woudl have to make hard choices about where to put those precious skill points.

 

But your approach is also good.

[Thorton_AP]

Given how easy it was to raise skills in FO3, there is really no reason that they should not have had considerably more impact on the gameplay.

 

Actually, given how easy it is to raise stats is probably why they didn't have considerably more impact on the gameplay.

[HoonDing]

Also agree. The impact of combat skills seemed to be very downplayed in FO3. Once a character had 50% there was never much reason to push a combat skill higher. I remember the first time I really pushed my small guns skill with a character and was quite disappointed how little effect there seemed to be from going from 50-100%. Was there some effect? Sure. But it could have been a lot more impressive. I also felt that characters with a very low combat skill weren't bad enough at it. I had plenty of small guns charcters who were still reasonbly effective at very low levels, when, more interesting would have been to have them lucky not to shoot themselves in the foot. Critical failures would have been fun, perhaps.

I think this is because of perks like Gunslinger/Commando/Sniper that boost accuracy by 25%. These perks should probably not even be in the game, since one is practically forced to max out all skills anyway.

 

I'm actually surprised that Beth has been OK with so many fairly significant changes to the gameplay. I give them credit for giving Obs the freedom to make so many changes.

It's a very smart move by Bethesda, using Obsidian as Guinea pig to see what they can & cannot do in an eventual sequel.

Edited May 23, 2010 by virumor

[Enoch]

Given how easy it was to raise skills in FO3, there is really no reason that they should not have had considerably more impact on the gameplay.

 

Actually, given how easy it is to raise stats is probably why they didn't have considerably more impact on the gameplay.

No, I think Slowtrain had it right. The reason that the effect of skill levels tends to get stripped out of ARPGs is that players generally dislike playing shootery combat that features their onscreen avatar missing what the player aims at. Short of taking the ME2 route and removing combat skills entirely, there are a couple of ways to mitigate this effect. Two of the more dubious ways of doing so are to make the difference in skill level minuscule, and to throw enough skillpoints at the player that he never gets to experience much of the low-skill state of affairs. Bethesda took the worst of both worlds and implemented both of these lousy approaches-- having already swamped the character in skillpoints, the drawback of making them matter a lot in the feel of the shooting goes away to a great degree. (Other, better ways to address this are to make the skill affect things other than accuracy or damage-- rate of fire, reload time, chance of a jam, rate of decay-- or to make leveling up a skill more about acquiring special moves than about marginal improvements in overall effectiveness.)

Edited May 23, 2010 by Enoch

[WorstUsernameEver]

I agree with all Gromnir's considerations. They could at list go for a mixed approach between accuracy and damage so even if you're dead-on accurate you can still put points raising your weapon damage (and with the damage threshold return, this could indeed be important) or... most probably the designers could come up with something better and more balanced than some rambling on a forum.

Or at least they should.

[Slowtrain]

(Other, better ways to address this are to make the skill affect things other than accuracy or damage-- rate of fire, reload time, chance of a jam, rate of decay-- or to make leveling up a skill more about acquiring special moves than about marginal improvements in overall effectiveness.)

 

 

That's definitely a worthwhile thought. And probably a good way to go.

 

Also, there's the SS2 way of simply requring certain stat/skill numbers before you can use a particular weapon, though the start/skills themselves have no effect on how the weapon performs.

 

Otoh though, Deus Ex managed to make the accuracy/damage/weapon skill thing work pretty well in a first person rpg format, and I found it be a very rewardign experience (minus a few problems).

[Pop]

Screencaps (supposedly) from The Strip.