Editorial Fallout 3 vs Diablo 3: How sequels should be made

[DarkUnderlord]

Tags: Fallout 3

With the sequel to both Diablo and Fallout now in the works. <a href="http://www.destructoid.com/blogs/Solivagant/diablo-3-vs-fallout-3-how-to-make-a-proper-sequel-92764.phtml">Somebody decided to compare the creation of the two</a>:
<br>
<blockquote>And now we got D3. It looks the same as D2 and D1. Two orbs. Mouse clicking. Iconic classes. It looks gorgeous as well. Using the same isometric (sic) perspective. And from what I can see, people are lapping it up. People are loving it, me included. Why? Well I guess it's reassuring to see a team that is made up of several different members from D2's team (even though it's still Blizzard) behind the steering wheel of this game, and how they managed to make the game be like what Diablo III SHOULD be like, in the hearts of fans and gamers in general.
<br>
<br>
All of this disturbs me. Why? Because I'm a fan of another franchise. One where action takes a sidestep into turn-based chaos, and dialog, options, different routes, take the center stage. A game whose setting was, and still is, unique.
<br>
<br>
You may know the series called Fallout. But what the gamewebs and the magazines and the boards are feeding you, isn't what Fallout is. That's a definition I'll leave for the fans of the franchise, known throughout the net as the most rabid fans there are, "glittering gems of hatred" as one has called them.</blockquote>
<br>
One day, you'll be able to apply to Harvard for a Doctorate in Gaming, I'm sure.
<br>
<br>
Spotted @ <a href="http://www.gamebanshee.com">The place you go if you want to harass Brother None</a>

 

[Zakhal]

Both companies chose the biggest fan base

- Fallout2 (~0.4 million iirc)
- The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (1.562 million)
- Diablo II (4 million)

Bethsoft had two bases of fans which to draw upon - either the fallout fans (0.4 million) or ES fans (1.5 million) and they chose the bigger one. Blizzards diablo had much bigger fan base than either fallout or ES - a massive 4 million so naturally they chose that.

So the difference is that there is 10 times more of diablo fans than fallout fans. Thats why diablo3 was faithful to its roots while fallout3 was not. If fallout2 had sold millions im sure we would see a true sequel for it too.

I wonder how much of the diablo sales are due to the fact that people want to play in battle.net so they had to buy the game (no access without valid key) instead of use pirated version. It could ultimately be piracy that made the difference here.

 

[gc051360]

Bethsoft had two bases of fans which to draw upon - either the fallout fans (0.4 million) or ES fans (1.5 million) and they chose the bigger one.

Then why bother making Fallout?

Why not just make ES V?

 

[Zakhal]

Then why bother making Fallout?

Why not just make ES V?

They wanted to make a fallout (as theyve said before many times) - and they did make it too. They just made "changes" so that they can use their existing oblivion fanbase to boost sales. Thats my guess anyways.

 

[gc051360]

They wanted to make a fallout (as theyve said before many times)

They aren't making a Fallout.

They are making a shooter.

They just made "changes" so that they can use their existing oblivion fanbase to boost sales. Thats my guess anyways.

They'd call them "improvements"

My guess is that they're talentless hacks, and the decision to make Fallout 3 was severely influenced by their hubris.

I hope it comes back to bite them.

 

[NiM82]

@ Zakhal

Going by your logic Blizzard should be making Diablo 3 an MMO 'cos WoW is more popular than Diablo 2.

A lot of the TES fanbase don't really give a shit about Fallout 3, they are more interested in swords & sorcery settings.

Bethesda is making Fallout 3 first person because that's all they have ever done, it's all they know how to do. Heaven forbid them actually trying something new.

 

[tunguska]

Why not just make ES V?

But they are making it. They just chose not to call it that. God knows why they paid all that money for the Fallout rights. But Bethesda are money guys. They can be hard to predict. Some "analyst" probably convinced Rob Altman that it was a smart investment. Like oil futures. Games are meaningless/pointless to Altman. It's just some kind of thing that his kids (or grandkids) like to do. He may as well be selling Legos or frisbees. None of this is personal. He is not raping the Fallout fans because he hates us and wants to see us suffer. It's just business. Remember that there are a hell of a lot more stupid people who hate thinking than there are smart people. If you only care about money to which group are you going to try to sell? To paraphrase H.L. Mencken, no one has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the general public.

 

[thesheeep]

I believe them if they say that they really wanted to make a Fallout game. Why should they lie about that?

The problem is, that

a) they don't have a clue what Fallout really is about

b) they know, but chose to make it a game for the bigger target audience.

Perhaps it is a mixture of a) and b). But in the end, who could blame them for choosing the bigger target audience? It just makes sense.
When you make a game, you're not making it for yourself and you don't make a game you would love to play. You make a game for your target audience. In most cases, you're somehow part of that target audience, of course.
This may be something different with indie development.

 

[aboyd]

But isn't the point of this topic that the "bigger target audience" thing is a myth? Diablo has a far bigger target audience, and yet they're going for a pulled back view that allows you to see the combat, similar to D1 & D2.

We had always heard that F3 had to be first person because that's modern and only old outdated games ever did it 3rd-person. Yet here's this brand new Diablo 3, probably won't even come out until after Fallout 3, so it's more modern, even newer, and yet it's using the so-called "old, outdated" point of view.

What this means to me is either that the Blizzard developers are morons who will see their game fail immediately upon release (because nobody wants that outdated view except for 15 hardcore old farts) or else the Bethesda developers are liars trying to justify massacring a fan favorite.

I didn't even like F1 & F2, but I'm on the fans side on this one.

 

[Herbert West]

Maybe Diablo III will rejuvenate isometric perspective a bit and stop the trend of going FP everywhere?

 

[ghostdog]

I hope that diablo III won't be another mindless hack-fest. It's good that it stays true to the previous games , but it could use more rpg elements.

 

[Zakhal]

@ Zakhal

Going by your logic Blizzard should be making Diablo 3 an MMO 'cos WoW is more popular than Diablo 2.

Making a new mmo is always a risk - and since they allready have a mmo that dominates the mmo market thers little reason to create a new one. Also diablo allready had like 4 million fans according to the sales numbers and thats more than plenty to draw upon. Little risk and huge fan base - it would be madness not to use that.

 

[OSK]

I hope that Fallout III won't be another thinking stats-fest. It's good that it stays true to the previous games , but it could use more fps elements.

:D

 

[Kingston]

Gonna have to quote Per from NMA.

Personally I think he's dead wrong because for me, Diablo was never about the gameplay but about fantasy stuff and that you interact with this fantasy world with creatures in it and cows. Accept it, things move on and games must change. If they could have done cows with more than 11 pixels don't you think they would have.

 

[Delirious Nomad]

Diablo is still in Blizzards hands. Fallout not. We can guess how F3 would turn out if made by Black Isle (tech demo).
I see Bethesda Fallout as Fallout Vats not as the true F3.
While Fallout (1 of course) is my most beloved game, I always thought D2 was a masterpiece in game programming featuring the best UI and gameflow.

 

[aboyd]

Gonna have to quote Per from NMA.

Are you quoting him because he completely missed the point? (The point being that now Blizzard can do cows with more than 11 pixels, and yet they've remained true to the classic style anyway. That would seem to undermine his contention.)

Or course, you're a smart guy Kingston, so I'm going to assume you didn't actually buy Per's BS and were just throwing it up here to see who would take the bait?

 

[Kingston]

Perhaps you need your sarcasm detector fixed.

 

[Xerxos]

I believe them if they say that they really wanted to make a Fallout game. Why should they lie about that?

The problem is, that

a) they don't have a clue what Fallout really is about

b) they know, but chose to make it a game for the bigger target audience.

[...]

You forgot
c) they are incompetent.

Oblivion has some of the worse design decisions I have ever seen in a game. Oblivion had much potential (which can be seen if you heavily mod the game) but was destroyed by an incompetent team of game designers...

 

[aboyd]

Good. That's a relief.

 

[JarlFrank]

What made me think about Fallout is that now its being handled by what I consider to be some of the worst collection of developers in this gaming age.

I love that quote from the article.

 

[Chefe]

I still think that Bethesda took the opening cinematic of Fallout 1 as being what the developers intended the game to look like, but couldn't, because it was impossible to make a first-person game before 1997.

 

[Gnidrologist]

Why do i have this constant deja vu?

 

[Morbus]

Both companies chose the biggest fan base

- Fallout2 (~0.4 million iirc)
- The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (1.562 million)
- Diablo II (4 million)

Bethsoft had two bases of fans which to draw upon - either the fallout fans (0.4 million) or ES fans (1.5 million) and they chose the bigger one. Blizzards diablo had much bigger fan base than either fallout or ES - a massive 4 million so naturally they chose that.

You suck.

According to you, Bethesda would be doing TES5.

 

[elander_]

Why would they want to make a Fallout game? Because they can't create their own classics and they lack the competence to evolve Fallout to a modern game engine and also mainstream it. Unlike Blizzard who has a culture of not treating game play as a bastard child.

 

[Truth]

Gonna have to quote Per from NMA.

Personally I think he's dead wrong because for me, Diablo was never about the gameplay but about fantasy stuff and that you interact with this fantasy world with creatures in it and cows. Accept it, things move on and games must change. If they could have done cows with more than 11 pixels don't you think they would have.

Good stuff. Scary that he's almost directly quoting what Toddler's said in the past.