Game News Fallout 3: Turn-Based?

[Whipporowill]

It all depends on how the game is viewed. Top-down or overhead would work without any problem. 3rd person like Kotor, isn't all that good... and 1st person would be horrible.

 

[Azael]

I think a 3D turn based game would be painful to play. KOTOR was fiddly enough.

Silent Storm, with the exception of some funky camera controls at times, proves you wrong.

 

[Vault Dweller]

From DAC:

Don't read too much into it, guys -- I just meant to let folks know that we are aware that the TES and Fallout series are totally different kinds of games. This wasn't a hint about any possible features of Fallout 3.

Of course, they need to be aware that Oblivion and FO3 are totally different games. Wouldn't want one of the developers to put a couple of supermutants somewhere in Tamriel accidentally.

 

[Spazmo]

People being down on 3D is silly. We tend to assume 3D necessarily leads to a different style of gameplay, but it's just another way of rendering things. 3D is more flexible and is rapidly becoming prettier than 2D.

Oh, and I could probably have told BethSoft that Fallout isn't the same as TES. I really don't know why they don't come to the fans for such in-depth expert analysis.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I guess they must be very disappointed right now. Probably going like "Hey, do you remember that Fallout license that Herve sold as a fantasy setting? Well, turns out it's not like TES at all! That sneaky French bastard!"

 

[littleboy]

I actually didn't mind FOT all that much. You just have to go into the game not expecting any charicter interaction or much of a plot, just combat. I think i played through most of it in real time too, only turning on turnbased if the action got hot and heavy. One of the things that anoyed me with playing fallout is the inability to use cover to your advantage or change stances ie. hide behind something while taking potshots at the opponint. What i really want to see is a rollplaying game with a great story and interaction coupled with the combat depth of JA2.


p.s. anyone heard if they have started dev. on Jagged Alliance 3 yet.

 

[littleboy]

Okay just answerd some of my own questions.

Jagged Alliance 3D is coming out about late 2005-2006 which will be a bit scaled down (just missions nothing else) and a full blown JA3 is coming out 2007 or so. Done by a Europen developer MiST, and published by Stratagy First. Oh and there is a board up here http://www.strategyfirst.com/forum/cgi/ ... 7;t=000096

just in case anyone cares

sorry for the off topic

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Okay just answerd some of my own questions.

http://www.rpgcodex.com/gamedetails.php?id=166

 

[Reklar]

Jagged Alliance 3D is coming out about late 2005-2006 which will be a bit scaled down (just missions nothing else) and a full blown JA3 is coming out 2007 or so. Done by a Europen developer MiST, and published by Stratagy First.

I'm not sure I understand why they are doing this since it would seem to detract from futures sales, not increase them. That seems akin to creating Fallout's engine and SPECIAL, then letting you run around a world with no character interaction or quests. Would someone like to enlighten me as to how this release strategy works in favor of the title?

-Reklar
(a Fallout/RPG fan)

 

[Limorkil]

Personally - and this is based on no evidence at all - I believe that Fallout 3 will be like Kotor, but with more freedom and more bugs.

Why?
Well, I think it has to be 3D 1st/3rd person because that is where Bethesda has experience.
I believe the dialogue system will be like kotor because no-one can be bothered to come up with something better.
I suspect you have to have a realtime/turn-based hybrid so that you can market it to fans of either style.
Kotor was amazingly successful, so a similar futuristic rpg should sell well.
And it's Bethesda, so you have to have more freedom and more bugs.

 

[Sol Invictus]

I think a 3D turn based game would be painful to play. KOTOR was fiddly enough.

Silent Storm, with the exception of some funky camera controls at times, proves you wrong.

Actually, it reiterates JanC's point, if anything. Silent Storm is a pain to play for a variety of camera-related reasons. I hate it when it's the enemy's turn or what have you and the camera starts to spin and do all sorts of shit just to focus in on the view. It's wildly erratic and a frequent cause of irritation. That, coupled with the horribly long loading times and retarded AI which paces back and forth before it comes to any decision are some of the reasons which keep me from playing Sentinels.

 

[Briosafreak]

I like S2 a lot, the camera thing isn`t a fault of beeing 3d, but it was a poor choice from the devs. There was a TB tactical squad game from some german guys several years ago, the first one i ever saw, that deatl with it in a much more eficient way, and more dramatic too. Can`t remember the name though, anyone?

I`m with Azael on this, just installed the Sentinels demo btw.

 

[suibhne]

The camera control in Silent Storm totally and entirely sucks, but it's a fault of the control design rather than the actual free camera. Essentially the same camera control was implemented brilliantly in Bungie's Myth I and Myth II, still my fave free-camera examples, and there's no damn reason it couldn't have been as clean and functional in Silent Storm other than poor decisions by the devs.

 

[RGE]

I never played Silent Storm, but I can't say that I liked the camera view in Myth and Myth II. And the casual gamer I borrowed Myth II from said he thought the game was too hard to figure out, and I don't blame him. The first battle sported enemies that surrounded my forces, and it was pretty much impossible to get the camera to show the important parts of the battle. This resulted in a few replays before I won without knowing how. That's not good design if you want a beginner to learn the ropes, and that camera never felt brilliantly implemented to me. But then again, perhaps it was the best possible way. It's not as if I've played any similar games, so I don't have any experience of how another camera would behave under those circumstances.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Static cameras are far better than the rotating crap of the Myth series because of how close you were to the action, it was rather difficult to pan the camera around and make it do what you wanted because of the limited viewing range. On the other hand, 3d cameras worked out well for the Total War series and Ground Control 1 (not the 2nd, which sucks) because of the vast and wide view distance.

You'll notice that games that tend to put you closer into the action like Warcraft 3 and Dawn of War use a static camera purely for design and mechanical purposes. I have no doubt that Silent Storm would have been much better with a static camera and cutaway walls to view interiors.

 

[Stark]

I've no problem with the camera control in Silent Storm. it's turn base, so it's a matter of adjusting it to your liking, taking as long as you like. unlike Myth (1,2) where action is real time and frantic, expert handling of camera is required.

I completed Myth2 by the way, so i lived to tell the tale.

but some preset choice of camera angle (letting you adjust it at the press of a button) would go a long way solving the said problems. You found an angle you like, you bind it to a key. You can have a few preset angles. anytime one turns out to be limiting you just press another key and it'll pan to that angle. You can have zoomed in angle and zoomed out angle and anything in between.

it was a long time ago but I remember getting totally intimidated by the free camera in homeworld. didn't even get past mission 2 due to the frantic nature of the game and camera control issue.

 

[Anonymous]

What is so hard about free cameras? I dont get it.

And it's Bethesda, so you have to have more freedom and more bugs.

When have they had freedom in their games?

ilent Storm is a pain to play for a variety of camera-related reasons. I hate it when it's the enemy's turn or what have you and the camera starts to spin and do all sorts of shit just to focus in on the view. It's wildly erratic and a frequent cause of irritation. That, coupled with the horribly long loading times and retarded AI which paces back and forth before it comes to any decision are some of the reasons which keep me from playing Sentinels.

image removed

I AM A FUCKING RETARD

 

[Ortchel]

Isn't that the Democrat seal ..?

 

[suibhne]

Well, at least we can agree that both Myth 2 and Silent Storm had major camera problems, in that the camera control schemes worked fine for some people and were totally infuriating for others. :D

I desperately want to be able to hotkey the camera in SS; I find the mouse control to be exceedingly frustrating. I can't bear playing for long simply because of the camera, and that's sad.

 

[littleboy]

what about the camera control in the total war series

 

[Sol Invictus]

Well, unlike you Patrick some of us have legitimate complaints and again, unlike you, we also don't troll by posting big stupid images with some dumb slogan on them everytime we disagree with what someone has to say about a subject.

Fuck off.

 

[JanC]

Is it possible to disable images in posts? No-one ever seems to use them for anything interesting or relevant.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Yeah, it's possible. Doesn't mean I'm ever going to disable it, but yeah, it's a setting.

 

[Astromarine]

I'd like to play a 3D RPG using the Dawn of War engine.