Interview Avellone Interview On Edge

[ghostdog]

New reno was awesome. Easily the best area in FO2.

 

[xuerebx]

I guess hardcore FO fans wouldn't like those areas as they don't really go with the setting. *shrug*

Doesn't make a difference to me.

 

[jiujitsu]

An accounting error...

 

[almondblight]

Didn't like New Reno or Vault City at all. Not sure how anyone at the codex can complain about stupid things in Fallout 3 when they love Fallout 2. I haven't played 3 yet, but none of the complaints I've heard brought up come close to the stupid things in Fallout 2.

Being a fluffer in New Reno was stupid. I think that was also the place where you get the "collect 30 porn magazines" mission? And you could work for all 4 families at the same time...choices and consequences! Also..."She turns over and goes to sleep. Perhaps she would have said more if you were a better lover." Then if you pick the "lover" perk you added (and there are actually people here that complain about Fallout 3's perks) she tells you everything. My god.

Vault City...don't remember much other than thinking..."oh good, finally a choice, either turn in the NCR spy or help the NCR spy." Then in the end I was able to do both. Oh, and the NPC in the vault signing the Fallout tune, and that you could go on a date, and that you could get +2 endurance for the cost of one appearance.

Yeah, Fallout 2 sucked. I can't imagine Fallout 3 being worse (it could be).

 

[RainSong]

Join date: 10 Aug 2004

dude what were you doing all this time? your trolling skills are pathetically low.

fail.

 

[almondblight]

Join date: 10 Aug 2004

Joined: 13 May 2008

Why is it that all the new kids think they have to think the same thing to win codex "cool points"? Look at the fucking New Vegas thread.

dude what were you doing all this time? your trolling skills are pathetically low.

fail.

Sorry, some of us like Fallout without shit bombs, ghosts, aliens, pinky and the brain, scientologists, bruce lee, talking plants, playing chess against scorpians, sex stats, porn collect-a-quests, and monty python. Some of us like choices having consequences, not working for 4 factions at the same time. Some of us like balance. Some of us like skills that work. Some of us like a plot that's not copied from the first game. Some of us, you know, have actual taste. Fallout 2 sucked.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Pretty much.

http://www.irontowerstudio.com/forum/in ... opic=275.0

"Fallout 1 is a well focused game. It's perfect. Everything is well designed, well thought-through, makes sense, and fits the theme and the setting. The Master, the "villain" of the game, isn't really a villain (he thought that he was doing the right thing), which is why it's possible to defeat him without a fight.

Fallout 2 is a "mix of everything" game. It's a game designed by a bunch of 13-year olds following the unbeatable "won't it be cool if the game had...." principle. It has huge gangsters with tommy guns running casinos, it has yakuza with samurai swords, it has so many weapons that you can switch to a new gun every 5 min, it has more lulz than the Codex, it has a king-fu fighting town, it has scientologists with celebrities, it has tribals, aliens, drug dealers, talking deathclaws, and even real GHOSTS. The game's a joke.

The main villain is a stereotypical "I kill everyone for the lulz" villain who looks like a giant robot. (the 13 year olds strike again!) You can't reason with him. The only way to beat the game is to fight him.

Overall, I feel that FO2 locations, NPCs, and quests are clearly inferior to FO1. While FO2 is better than most games (mostly due to being a sequel to a great game), it failed to deliver the quality of the original."

As for New Reno:

VD: Let's go briefly through your career-defining moments. Fallout 2, New Reno. It's a well done town, especially from a role-playing point of view. There is only one problem, it doesn't fit into the setting. Why did you decide to do it that way?

MCA: Why doesn't it fit with the setting? Maybe you're right.

VD: It's a gangster town. Btw, you don't need to care about my opinion, feel free to explain in your answer that it fits perfectly and people who think otherwise are blind morons.

MCA: But I do care about your opinion. Come on, tell me.

VD: I feel that organized crime and "families" are too much for a post-apoc setting. Organized crime, in my opinion, requires a much more developed social infrastructure. In a less developed one, there is no reason for bandits and raiders to form anything higher than a gang.

MCA: Okay, well that's no fun. I completely disagree with that. I think if you have the organized structure for towns, cities, caravans, religious cults, water merchants, then you can either have some structure that equates to that or a predator that feeds on those structures (like Decker was in the Hub, and he was many, many years before New Reno). I was going off a one-page design outline for the area that Tim Cain had done, but I agreed with it, and I am sure Tim would still agree with it on principle, if not on execution.

VD: The reasons and needs for creation and development of organized settlements (towns) and religion are different than those for creation and development of organized crime. Without turning it into an essay, there is a good reason why the Sicilian Mafia, the first of the organized crime models, was developed only in 19th century due to industrialization & trade.

As for Decker, again, there is a difference between a criminal operating in a bar and mobsters running casinos and drug labs

MCA: Secondly, I (and Tom French, now a rockstar at Pandemic) had a lot of fun working on New Reno. I think it presents a lot of fun role-playing opportunities and things to do, no matter what "type" of character you are, but does it fit in the setting? No, probably not. It's too sexually over the top, too much profanity, and the look and attitude of some of the characters is too modern-day to complement the feel of the Fallout world (the Mordino family, the fedora hats, the porn studio, the tommy guns, shivs). In that respect, I would consider it an immature design, and while I had fun with it, I don't think it was the best rendition of a section of the Fallout world. It also had horrible load times because I crammed too much stuff in there.

But I still think it was fun to play, and it was fun to design. And I think it was cool to be able to go back there after the game was over and have some fun. And killing the crime bosses in secret ways was fun. And I liked Golgotha, even if the name was inappropriate. And I liked Lenny's Dad (thanks, French).

 

[muds_animal_friend]

Sorry, some of us like Fallout without shit bombs, ghosts, aliens, pinky and the brain, scientologists, bruce lee, talking plants, playing chess against scorpians, sex stats, porn collect-a-quests, and monty python

True, I know I do.

 

[The Idiot]

Same with me, though I wouldn't say that FO2 sucks.

 

[denizsi]

sip

That whole interview bit reminded me of confronting The Master in FO and showing him the errors of his way.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Only if the Master says that while he sees your points, enslaving nations with super mutants is fun, so...

 

[Lyric Suite]

Fallout 2 is a "mix of everything" game. It's a game designed by a bunch of 13-year olds following the unbeatable "won't it be cool if the game had...." principle. It has huge gangsters with tommy guns running casinos, it has yakuza with samurai swords, it has so many weapons that you can switch to a new gun every 5 min, it has more lulz than the Codex, it has a king-fu fighting town, it has scientologists with celebrities, it has tribals, aliens, drug dealers, talking deathclaws, and even real GHOSTS. The game's a joke.

And for all that it still manages to be a better game then F3. Or is it?

 

[Vault Dweller]

A much better game. No comparison.

 

[Jaesun]

Fallout 2 is a "mix of everything" game. It's a game designed by a bunch of 13-year olds following the unbeatable "won't it be cool if the game had...." principle. It has huge gangsters with tommy guns running casinos, it has yakuza with samurai swords, it has so many weapons that you can switch to a new gun every 5 min, it has more lulz than the Codex, it has a king-fu fighting town, it has scientologists with celebrities, it has tribals, aliens, drug dealers, talking deathclaws, and even real GHOSTS. The game's a joke.

And for all that it still manages to be a better game then F3. Or is it?

VD already said that Fallout 3 was also a giant "wouldn't it be cool if..." game, in his MNA review. Surprised he used the same analogy for Fallout 2, but it actually fits.

Does Fallout 2 feature stupid fucking lab coats that raise your fucking science skill by +5? no (who comes up with this shit? Seriously). At least the Sunglasses in Fallout 2 make sense.

Fallout 2 Wins!

 

[The Idiot]

Though FO3 actually has some focus. There's nothing as out of place as, let's say, San Francisco in FO2. They paid more attention to how FO looked and felt than BIS did.

Still, FO2 is a stronger RPG.

 

[Forest Dweller]

I can see all these points, but I still think Fallout 2 is a better game than the original. I guess most of this simply comes from the fact that it's bigger. I know that may seem a childish thing to be happy about, but when that also translates into more C&C, well...That makes it better in my book. Fallout 2 felt like a fully fleshed out version of Fallout 1.

The writing was also better.

 

[denizsi]

Only if the Master says that while he sees your points, enslaving nations with super mutants is fun, so...

Deep down inside, he was having fun, but mutants are serious business; you can't let it show or people will take your mutant army for a traveling circus.

Though FO3 actually has some focus. There's nothing as out of place as, let's say, San Francisco in FO2. They paid more attention to how FO looked and felt than BIS did.

This is mostly true in a way. I've just finished FO3, after exploring almost every inch of the gameworld (excluding The Pitt DLC), and it's a stupid game overall, but Capital Wasteland is a wasteland alright. But it's a stupid game full of... stupidity.

 

[Claw]

This is mostly true in a way. I've just finished FO3, after exploring almost every inch of the gameworld (excluding The Pitt DLC), and it's a stupid game overall, but Capital Wasteland is a wasteland alright. But it's a stupid game full of... stupidity.

So that's the focus. At least the game's consistent.

 

[denizsi]

In a cosmetic way.

 

[Volourn]

FO2 > FO1

Period.

TRUE FO fans know this to be a fact beyond dispute.

 

[poocolator]

Though FO3 actually has some focus. There's nothing as out of place as, let's say, San Francisco in FO2. They paid more attention to how FO looked and felt than BIS did.

Still, FO2 is a stronger RPG.

Truthfully, FO3 gives the impression of being the most haphazardly-designed FPS I've played. I don't believe they had a focus, at all.

 

[Hamster]

Sorry, some of us like Fallout without shit bombs, ghosts, aliens, pinky and the brain, scientologists, bruce lee, talking plants, playing chess against scorpians, sex stats, porn collect-a-quests, and monty python.

And some of us can see positve and negative sides to both approaches to setting and can appreciate bothof them, without refering to "my taste is longer than yours" arguments.

Still, i think that there is a line that should not be crossed - New Reno and kung-fu monks were too cheesy even for me, even if they were fun gameplay-wise.

 

[Hamster]

Overall, I feel that FO2 locations ... are clearly inferior to FO1. .

I cannot agree with this. Consistent design is not everything. Locations in F1 were all made from one set of sprites and most included "city official vs gang" quest line. F1 may be a better RPG, thats true, but locations in F1 were boring.

 

[Jasede]

I disagree. Locations in FO 1 were gray, desolate and without joy or color- locations in FO 2 were garish, incoherent, random and plentiful.

It boils down to this: would you rather dine in a wonderfully fancy and very expensive restaurant, with small, carefully arranged dishes for 250$ or would you rather go 25 times to McDonalds with the same amount of money?

 

[Stereotypical Villain]

I disagree. Locations in FO 1 were gray, desolate and without joy or color- locations in FO 2 were garish, incoherent, random and plentiful.

It boils down to this: would you rather dine in a wonderfully fancy and very expensive restaurant, with small, carefully arranged dishes for 250$ or would you rather go 25 times to McDonalds with the same amount of money?

25 times to McDonalds? Isn't that like commiting suicide?