Bethesdas options regarding Fallout3

[damaged_drone]

i think that given console and $$ considerations, fallout style turnbased combat is absolutely not a realistic option for the beth devs. if we take that as a given, what options do they have and what forseeable impact is this going to have for special?

other than the most likely 1st person realtime option the only possibilty i can see is a well paced phase based, pausable combat system similar (but much improved) to the kotor games with a fallout perspective.

if they do go 1st person, is gun skill going to be relegated to weapon damage modifiers? because as ive read with hellgate:london they are 'solving' the player aiming for your character problem with area effect and magic missile style weapons. i fail to see how this is possible with pistols and sniper rifles which surely are mandatory. is fps(+rpg) actually on the table?

 

[Zomg]

Character-skill moderated aiming has been around forever. See Deus Ex, System Shock 2, Mount & Blade, etc.

I'd much rather have Deus Ex styled combat than RTw/P, if those are my choices. Mount and Blade style would be even better. I don't think there would be any particular problems retrofitting SPECIAL, although it has such insignificant brand value that I don't know why Bethesda would keep a version of it, particularly when it's so orthogonal to their typical design philosophy.

Edit - How could you have paused phase based combat?

 

[Lumpy]

Some of my classmates say that Fallout is a piece of shit. Just because it's turn based, thus "unrealistic". Yes, it's stupid, but Bethesda would lose a lot of sales if they made it turn based again.

 

[Xi]

I don't think we are giving any credit to the Turn Based folks.

Certainly there may be more money in action/realtime but that doesn't mean they wouldn't still make a killing doing a turn-based 3rd/iso. Even if they didn't make as much, it may still be worth a try. You can still have amazing graphics with that perspective. Plus, a lot of the old school crowd may come out of hiding if they cater to them - as opposed to the fucktard console kitties.

I'm having a hard time envisioning anything. I doubt they will make it TES: Fallout. FYI, they don't want to fuck with the hardcore crowd.

Should be interesting, but we have another year before we will see any info about it. It's not making it to this E3, im thinking 2007 E3.

 

[Lumpy]

The thing is, real time doesn't restrict your audience (well, not much anyway), while turn based does. Some people (like Solik) wouldn't buy the game just because it would be turn based, idiotically ignoring any positive facts about the game.

 

[Xi]

There are also people who won't play Real-Time? *shrug*

I understand the arguement though. Realtime seems to attract the broadest audience. Damned corporate thinking.

 

[damaged_drone]

Character-skill moderated aiming has been around forever. See Deus Ex, System Shock 2, Mount & Blade, etc.

I'd much rather have Deus Ex styled combat than RTw/P, if those are my choices. Mount and Blade style would be even better. I don't think there would be any particular problems retrofitting SPECIAL, although it has such insignificant brand value that I don't know why Bethesda would keep a version of it, particularly when it's so orthogonal to their typical design philosophy.

Edit - How could you have paused phase based combat?

they've made a concious effort to remove skill based to-hit in oblivion because its 'counter-intuitive' so i would assume that if they go 1st person for fallout the same would apply, especially for melee, although now that i think about it bows are still skill based to-hit i think. but what happens if you suck at aiming and you as a player miss? do you have to aim correctly and then also make a skill check to hit your enemy? doesnt sound too flash to me.
phase based is continuous turns, where orders are put into a queue to be played out in real time. called shots would require pausing i would think, or if you were getting a bit overwhelmed. i could see a lot going wrong with it tho.
i havent played mount and blade so i dont know how that works.

 

[Lumpy]

There are also people who won't play Real-Time? *shrug*

No, I don't think there's anyone who won't play a real-time game. That's the point.

 

[Xi]

Actually, Final Fantasy had(past tense) Turn-Based combat, and it sells like crazy. Obviously, they have moved to Real-time too.(Or so I have heard)

Still, I think it proves that a turn-based game can still be successful and sell a few million copies.

There are also people who won't play Real-Time? *shrug*

No, I don't think there's anyone who won't play a real-time game. That's the point.

I've heard people argue that they don't like real-time, and won't play it. Still, I think your more then correct given the current mindset(or lack there of) of console kiddies these days.

 

[Zomg]

they've made a concious effort to remove skill based to-hit in oblivion because its 'counter-intuitive' so i would assume that if they go 1st person for fallout the same would apply, especially for melee, although now that i think about it bows are still skill based to-hit i think. but what happens if you suck at aiming and you as a player miss? do you have to aim correctly and then also make a skill check to hit your enemy? doesnt sound too flash to me.

Deus Ex type character-moderated aiming is done by having the actual path of the projectile disperse within a targeting reticle. The higher your skill, the smaller the reticle gets, and the less dispersed the possible bullet paths are and thus more accurate. This is the same procedure that Mount & Blade uses for projectile weapons. There is no to-hit roll, the projectile hitting or missing is WYSIWYG.

phase based is continuous turns, where orders are put into a queue to be played out in real time. called shots would require pausing i would think, or if you were getting a bit overwhelmed. i could see a lot going wrong with it tho.
i havent played mount and blade so i dont know how that works.

No, that's real time with pause, plus queued actions, not phase based. Phase based has a couple of definitions in my head, but none of them are compatible with real time.

 

[damaged_drone]

yea youre right. but then, once your characer is highly skilled and you have a tiny reticle, you are playing a fps? or do you implement auto-aim? if you have auto-aim to negate twitch how do you make targetted shots?

 

[Zomg]

once your characer is highly skilled and you have a tiny reticle, you are playing a fps?

Yes.

 

[Excrément]

maybe they will let the player the choice between real time and turn-based like the very good strategy game : M.A.X.

 

[Antagonist]

That would require a top-down isometic interface with point-and-click controls which is not assured given that Bethesda likes to make 3rd person games with direct control of the character.

 

[NeVeRLiFt]

I love Fallout and Fallout 2, but I say fuck Fallout 3 since Bethesda is just using the name as a cash cow and won't make the game the CRPG it should be.
(Hey Bethesda if you're reading this prove me wrong)

After having said this I must say I look forward to Stalker.

Not sure if Stalker will ever be released or how the development is coming but I like what I have saw so far and hope the game comes out soon. Otherwise it will end up like Duke Nukem Forever.

 

[Fresh]

I'd have a blast playing Deus Ex in the Fallout setting.

The question is if Beth can pull off the challenge of capturing the atmosphere and allowing free, fun gameplay.

 

[NeVeRLiFt]

I'd have a blast playing Deus Ex in the Fallout setting.

The question is if Beth can pull off the challenge of capturing the atmosphere and allowing free, fun gameplay.

If you liked Deus Ex you should give System Shock 2 a try.

 

[Levski 1912]

Let's face it- Fallout 3 will most likely use FPS conventions, as they're far more popular than TB, and the inclusion of guns could draw in the FPS crowd. While I'd love to play another TB Fallout, I wouldn't mind a first-person Fallout if and only if it includes all the other elements that made the previous games so good.

 

[Fresh]

So which of the elements that made isometric Fallout a great game

a) could possibly be captured in a "fps-RPG"
b) could not (Never I tell you!!) be captured in a "fps-RPG"

?

EDIT: Let's pretend it's a group of all the best game devs and writers in history that are making FO3 and that they have to use the RT FPS format.. What then? What could they accomplish with such a game?

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

Whatever they do, it's a given the RPGcodex and NMA fanboys are gonna go ballistic about it. I think they are actually looking forward to it.

 

[kaizoku]

What would be the problem of Bethesdas from implementing 2 different gameplays?
Classic mode for the old schoolers. Real-time FPS for the retarded schoolers.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Whatever they do, it's a given the RPGcodex and NMA fanboys are gonna go ballistic about it. I think they are actually looking forward to it.

Abso-fucking-lutely. It's going to be the biggest shitstorm in gaming history.

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

What would be the problem of Bethesdas from implementing 2 different gameplays?
Classic mode for the old schoolers. Real-time FPS for the retarded schoolers.

NO! that would betray the true Fallout spirit! Fallout can only be Fallout in 2D isometric and trun based combat. Go get eaten by a deathclaw!

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

Whatever they do, it's a given the RPGcodex and NMA fanboys are gonna go ballistic about it. I think they are actually looking forward to it.

Abso-fucking-lutely. It's going to be the biggest shitstorm in gaming history.

Within this bubble, yes.

 

[Fresh]

Whatever they do, it's a given the RPGcodex and NMA fanboys are gonna go ballistic about it. I think they are actually looking forward to it.

Abso-fucking-lutely. It's going to be the biggest shitstorm in gaming history.

Within this bubble, yes.

Since the nazi-FO-fans are going to feel buttfucked and bitch whatever Beth do with the game I'm not particulary interested in their opinions in this matter.