Interview NMA discusses Fallout 3 with Desslock

[Vault Dweller]

Tags: Bethesda Softworks; Fallout 3

<a href=http://www.nma-fallout.com>NMA</a> has had a <a href=http://www.nma-fallout.com/article.php?id=39391>chat with Desslock</a>, discussing various Fallout 3 aspects.
<br>
<br>
<blockquote>Heh, I did get a chuckle out of your conclusions when (SuAside, in particular) commented on how he was trying to be "objective" - that's absurd. You're not objective - and there's not wrong with that, because you're obviously strongly influenced by your passion for the original Fallout games, and all of your observations are affected by that subjective bias. Frankly, I think that's actually an appealing trait, because rather than just describe the features, characters, graphics, background lore, etc., you saw in the demo, you constantly (in almost every paragraph!) provide a relative comparison to how those aspects were treated in the original games.
<br>
<br>
Embrace your subjectivity - it's a perspective that I suspect your readers want, and it allows you to provide insights that other previewers are incapable of, or disinterested in, providing - it seems like you stated you were trying to be objective in order to increase your credibility, which is just absurd, because that's the sort of statement that readers immediately know to be false, and probably would be less interested in reading your commentary if it were otherwise.
<br>
...
<br>
<br>
I definitely would have preferred a Troika version of Fallout 3 (with Obsidian naturally being my second choice as developer), and I greatly miss isometric perspective RPGs, but I really like what I've seen of Fallout 3. I've played virtually every RPG since Temple of Apshai, and there have been very few RPGs that I've been more excited about.
<br>
<br>
That said, one of the RPGs that I was most excited about was the initial design of Ultima IX, after the debacle of Ultima VIII-Pagan, and by the time Ultima IX limped to release, it bore little resemblance to its initial design and was almost as big a disaster as Pagan (damn you, Ed Del Castillo for derailing the initial design, and EA for destroying all that was great about the Ultima games). So the bottom line is, I think it's still far too early for anyone to fairly judge how good Fallout 3 will be, and we should constantly challenge and revise our preconceptions and opinions as more information becomes available about the game.</blockquote>I actually agree with Desslock. A lot.

 

[Brother None]

As long as you agree with me more

 

[MasPingon]

I agree with you

 

[elander_]

Has anyone ever tried to judge Fallout 3 except for the obvious pessimistic statement that Fallout 3 will suck? Next time they are going to argue that people don't have the right to be pessimistic about this game. Desslock is of course right that every review of computer games is strongly subjective (however i think he was trying to imply that NMA reviews are more subjective than the rest). The proof of subjectivity is that someone may have played a ton of rpgs and still thinks that Oblivion was made to provide a strong role-playing experience. Each people sees role-playing in a very different way.

 

[Deleted member 7219]

What has Desslock said in the past that made people here dislike him?

 

[MountainWest]

He's an Oblivion fanboy.

 

[Oarfish]

So you need to have exactly how much publisher cock in your mouth to qualify for the objective journalism club? The concept is rare enough among real journalists, never mind the late developers at gamespy.

 

[Vault Dweller]

What has Desslock said in the past that made people here dislike him?

Something like "Oblivion is the best RPG evar!". Different words, but EXACTLY the same meaning.

 

[Andyman Messiah]

Good chat. And I gotta say I find myself agreeing with Desslock for the first time in what's probably a bunch of years.

Incidentally, as I typed that I looked outside my window and saw angels falling from a sky as red as the blood I'm sporting on the inside, with horned devils emerging from under the asphalt sticking pitchforks into little kids. Probably just a coincidence.

 

[Elhoim]

I think that they are subjective in a different way. NMA is subjective using the original Fallouts as a comparison point. Professional journalist are subjective using the ammount of money they recieved as a comparison point.

But the NMA guys were a lot more objective as they used more facts than adjectives as "AWESOME!" or "NEXT-GEN".

 

[Oarfish]

So, despite the man sounding half reasonable in that interview does anybody want to bet that Desslock contributes anything other than 6/5 "Best Fallout Evar" to the inevitable mainstream review bukkake?

 

[Deleted member 7219]

What has Desslock said in the past that made people here dislike him?

Something like "Oblivion is the best RPG evar!". Different words, but EXACTLY the same meaning.

Ah, I see.

Weird how he loves Oblivion but thinks Fallout 3 would be in better hands elsewhere. Most Oblivion fanboys I see on the internet, such as those at Gamespot, thinks Bethesda will do a cracking job with Fallout 3 because Oblivion was so cool.

 

[Volourn]

"But the NMA guys were a lot more objective as they used more facts than adjectives as "AWESOME!" or "NEXT-GEN"."

You can still be bias, and unobjective while using facts. Politicians do it all the time. So do lawyers.

 

[VonVentrue]

What has Desslock said in the past that made people here dislike him?

Something like "Oblivion is the best RPG evar!". Different words, but EXACTLY the same meaning.

Considering the fact that these words came from the same man who claims to "have played virtually every RPG since Temple of Apshai", allow me to take the liberty of saying that something is terribly wrong here...

 

[Brother None]

He doesn't claim, he really has.

NMA also recently published a set of really good interview Desslock conducted with Tim Cain about Fallout 1 and Feargus Urquhart about Fallout 2.

Desslock has been a dedicated RPG fans for ages, and is a big fan of isometric RPGs and the more dedicated and deeper single-player experiences as offered by, say, Troika.

So what makes him love Oblivion so much? Honestly, I have no idea. I know he likes Bethesda because he's impressed by what they do as an "independant developer" (I don't really consider Bethesda independant myself, but whatever), but what he loves about Oblivion as an RPG? Eh, no idea.

 

[Krafter]

I think it's still far too early for anyone to fairly judge how good Fallout 3 will be, and we should constantly challenge and revise our preconceptions and opinions as more information becomes available about the game.

This is the part that I can't agree with. At all.

It is pretty obvious what the final result is going to be, IMHO. We really don't need any more information. It has been, and always will be, Oblivion with guns.

 

[Otingocni]

The Desslock quote is: Oblivion is one of the greatest RPGs of all time, and you just sound silly suggesting otherwise - let alone trying to divorce it from the genre, when it\\\'s actually one of the best representations of the genre, ever - just because you prefer the 6 RPGs that have been released with more dialogue choices.

Vault Dweller, do you agree with Desslock on the combat in Fallout 3?

 

[Vault Dweller]

With these statements?

"I don't agree with the preceding paragraph. The last sentence is just wrong - BioWare only produced two Infinity Engine games (Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, and the related expansions), and the first game in that series didn't come out until the late 1990s (so your dating is wrong, a minor detail, but you guys are obviously pay great attention to detail, so I thought I'd flag it).

More importantly, the reference makes no sense to me - neither Baldur's Gate game had action points or "super-attacks". The system is clearly closer to the "aimed shot" mechanic of the Fallout games - you use perception, get targeting information, and inflict damage based upon targeted shots and your weapon skills -- there's nothing like that in the Baldur's Gate games, and the only thing Fallout 3's combat has in common with the Baldur's Gate games is that it occurs in real-time, and is pausable.

Finally, as you know, I have concerns about the combat as well, and look forward to learning more about it and seeing it in action. But it's clearly unfair and misleading to call it unoriginal, when there's actually never been a similar system utilized by an RPG. It culls aspects of features from other games, but the combat system certainly seems unique. Again, that doesn't necessarily mean we'll like it or that it'll satisfy Fallout veterans, but it's certainly an original, hybrid combat system."

Sure. Why not?

 

[Black]

What has Desslock said in the past that made people here dislike him?

Something like "Oblivion is the best RPG evar!". Different words, but EXACTLY the same meaning.

Somehow I lost my interest.

 

[Volrath]

What has Desslock said in the past that made people here dislike him?

I think he once claimed Oblivion to be a worthy Ultima successor.

 

[roshan]

Comparing combat in Fallout 3 with combat in the Infinity Engine games is absurd. For one thing, Infinity Engine combat played out quite slowly - you attack only once every six seconds at a low level, and it takes roughly that much time to cast a spell as well. Furthermore, walking speed, except in Torment, where you could run, was always quite slow. This meant that the time taken to pause the game was negligible in terms of the big picture, therefore despite being real time, it did not involve twitching at all. In the Infinity Engine, one did not pause merely to initiate special attacks, but one paused for virtually everything, from surveying the isometric perspective battlefield, moving characters, casting spells and choosing new targets.

On the other hand, Fallout 3's combat seems to be largely like that of any first person shooter, except it has "action points" (aka mana) which can be used for aimed shots.

 

[Brother None]

Ok, this is becoming a bit deceiving now. Desslock got bent down on the Infinity engine topic, I never claimed it was identical or even *like* Infinity Engine combat. The preview says:
labeled anything from innovative to the worst idea of all time, I don't really see either one as being very valid. "Unoriginal" is the name I'd use. If I had to describe V.A.T.S. at gun point, I'd call it a system of RT combat with limited pausing through fatigue (Action Points) and super-attacks (aimed shot), which to most people will sound pretty much like what BioWare started doing in the mid-90s with the Infinity Engine

If you read that carefully, you'll see I'm saying this is a continuation of BioWare's RTwP. Like Mass Effect, which it *is* functionally identical to, it is a modern evolution of what BioWare started then.

I never claimed anything other than that, and when Desslock says "there's nothing like that in the Baldur's Gate games" I don't disagree with him. But thing is, I never did. I'm saying it's functionally identical to Mass Effect, no need to claim anyone anywhere ever compared it directly to Baldur's Gate.

Sure. Why not?

Having seen Fallout 3 and having seen Mass Effect, I can say it's not original. So that's a bit of that quote you can disagree with.

 

[Claw]

I think he once claimed Oblivion to be a worthy Ultima successor.

Yeah, it's pretty hard to forgive him for that.

 

[sqeecoo]

"But the NMA guys were a lot more objective as they used more facts than adjectives as "AWESOME!" or "NEXT-GEN"."

You can still be bias, and unobjective while using facts. Politicians do it all the time. So do lawyers.

Volorun is the only one really talking sense here.

In the second paragraph of the newspost Dessie says some ok things, but not much beyond "I played a lot of RPGs". His conclusion about FO3 is not very good, as Krafter pointed out.

But the bit about objectivity is pure bullshit. Sure, it's absurd to claim to be 100% objective, but it's equally absurd to claim everyone is 100% subjective.
It's an objective truth that the NMA preview is the most objective preview out there. Of course, I am biased towards NMA, but that does not change the fact that what I say is true.
You can be biased and right.

You are always somewhat biased, but one description can be more objective than another.

Dessie's rant on subjectivity is just him trying to justify his incredibly shitty previews and reviews.

 

[Badesumofu]

His conclusion about FO3 is not very good, as Krafter pointed out.

Um, what? Have you played the final version of Fallout 3? Has Krafter? Upon what evidence do either of you base the conclusion that F3 will be 'Oblivion With Guns' and thus suck?

The have been major and meaningful differences demonstrated between the two games. 'Oblivion With Guns' is getting old; F3 is said to have branching quests, choice and consequence, the ability to do things out of order ala F1/2 and Arcanum, non-wiki-style dialouge, multiple endings, XP based character system... the list goes on. They have an engine and a dev team in common.

Bethesda aren't who I'd choose to make F3, not by a long shot. I thought Oblivion was drab and dull. As Michael Madej said, sort of like an MMO, but without any of the things that make MMOs fun.

I think F3 could be a pretty fun game, I try to divorce it from the previous Fallouts in my mind, because if I look at it as a true successor to Fallout, I know I'll be very dissapointed. I mean, if the game that is developed as Fallout 3 had been demoed to The Codex as a generic Post-Apoc shooter/RPG being made by an unheard of studio, the reaction would be pretty positive. Because it's Beth, and because it's Fallout, though, it's virtually impossible for people who loved Fallout 1 and hated Oblivion to be remotely objective about Fallout 3.