Preview Hype Machine 1, Fallout fans Nil

[Futile Rhetoric]

One is that I simply believe that elements like Turn-Based and Isometric were artifacts of their time.

God, give me strength.

 

[Excrément]

Maybe it will be Real-Time and Turn-Based. Like an opption you choose at the beginning.
It worked quite well for M.A.X 2. Even if I think that could be quite hard to implement in a RPG.

 

[Futile Rhetoric]

Maybe it will be Real-Time and Turn-Based. Like an opption you choose at the beginning.
It worked quite well for M.A.X 2. Even if I think that could be quite hard to implement in a RPG.

And maybe the day Fallout 3 is released, tiny little monkeys will start flying out of our asses, causing all kinds of shenanigans.

 

[mister lamat]

maybe the gamebryo engine is incredibly flexible. there's a world of difference between the mechanics of civ4 and that of oblivion.

 

[Micmu]

Depends largely on the scope of the engine they are talking about.
When they are talking about the Oblivion engine (and not Gamebryo) it probably means Gamebryo (rendering, assets, and other general stuff) + bethesda's specific code, like scripting system, how objects and locations are organized, dialogue system (construction set), hell, maybe even the combat system.

 

[mister lamat]

i wouldn't doubt that a tonne of code would be recycled, especially object organization and the dialogue (which can play but failed really horribly). the rewrites to combat in general though would have to so intense that starting from scratch minus basic behaviour routines would be the best route.

just pointing out that gamebryo is pretty damn flexible and one of the better engines out there. if it were my ball, that's where i'd be starting just because it's honestly fun to use.

 

[Araanor]

GameBryo is primarily about rendering. It's not related to any particular combat system licensors may implement in their games.

 

[Section8]

Rabid nitpickers of the world unite! You have nothing to lose but your dignity!

Nitpickery indeed. People who want Fallout to actually have the gameplay of Fallout and not just the setting are splitting hairs. I mean, when it comes to games, what's more trivial than gameplay?

 

[HanoverF]

Arcanum > Fallout.
Planescape > both.

Lumpy != Smart

The fact kingcomrade agrees with you should point out how wrong you are.

 

[DarkSign]

GameBryo is primarily about rendering. It's not related to any particular combat system licensors may implement in their games.

And scene design, but yeah primarily rendering. They're working on MMO tools as we speak.

 

[Lumpy]

Arcanum > Fallout.
Planescape > both.

Lumpy != Smart

The fact kingcomrade agrees with you should point out how wrong you are.

How wrong am I?
And about what? Fallout vs Arcanum? Or PST vs FO?

 

[mister lamat]

GameBryo is primarily about rendering. It's not related to any particular combat system licensors may implement in their games.

unless it's all corridor no cover you have to go back to the primary to address ranged combat which has to be far more heavily featured than in oblivion.

 

[JarlFrank]

Arcanum > Fallout.
Planescape > both.

Lumpy != Smart

The fact kingcomrade agrees with you should point out how wrong you are.

How wrong am I?
And about what? Fallout vs Arcanum? Or PST vs FO?

PST >>>> Everything.
That's a fact.

I also wish Troika to be revived and to make an Arcanum 2, on a side note.
I'd not like someone like Bethesda buying the license and screwing it up, though.

 

[stargelman]

Arcanum > Fallout.
Planescape > both.

Lumpy != Smart

The fact kingcomrade agrees with you should point out how wrong you are.

He may be an annoying pest sometimes, but he's no idiot.

 

[kingcomrade]

The fact kingcomrade agrees with you

Hanover = Illiterate?

 

[Hazelnut]

Fallout is not - for me - defined by its perspective. It's defined by the unique setting, and the meaningful, satisfying choices I can make to affect that setting. I don't care where the camera is. If those things are intact, they can put the camera in geosynchronous Goddamn orbit.

Rabid nitpickers of the world unite! You have nothing to lose but your dignity!

I actually agree to some extent with that PA statement, but it's missing the TB combat and true reflection of character skills in the game world which is far, far easier in a non FP perspective. I also don't care about the camera in isolation - it's the consequences of the decision on the rest of the game mechanics that's really important to me. I also think that the setting and atmosphere tend to overshadow the mechanics and RPGness of Fallout to such an extent that many non-fan players, I suspect Beth included, think that the atmosphere is the be all and end all of Falloutyness. Without the words "meaningful, satisfying choices I can make to affect that setting" the PA quote would be terribly depressing, as it is it's tolerable.

 

[franc kaos]

Maybe it will be Real-Time and Turn-Based. Like an opption you choose at the beginning.
It worked quite well for M.A.X 2. Even if I think that could be quite hard to implement in a RPG.

Yea, like the choice at the beginning of Oblivion over which interface to use, or how much info to show on the compass, or the ability to delete spells (which they still haven't included in two patches and an expansion). Bethsoft aren't just about tyranny of choice in gameplay, but in game mechanics too.

The game must look and play the same across the three machines, PC, 360, PS3. So even if the PS3 and PC can display soft shadows with lightening speed, they won't be included because the 360 can't.

 

[Claw]

Fallout is not - for me - defined by its perspective. It's defined by the unique setting, and the meaningful, satisfying choices I can make to affect that setting. I don't care where the camera is. If those things are intact, they can put the camera in geosynchronous Goddamn orbit.

Fallout is not - for me - defined by Jerry Holkins.

On a more serious note, of course perspective matters. FP isn't a new technical innovation, it was used in ancient RPGs to convey a certain atmosphere and other games used a different perspective for good reasons. A geosnychronous orbit may be a great choice for Supreme Commander, but I have my doubts that it'd be well suited for Fallout. Just imagine the Talking Heads if you see everything from above. Or worse, if your character is inside a building! HAR HAR.

The entire "what Fallout is about" argument is idiotic. There is no Fallout essence. Fallout, like any good game, is like a dish with different ingredients combined in a specific way. You can't throw a bunch of of ingredients in a pot and expect a star-quality meal to come out.

You, concerning about BOS too much in the promo art, check back at FO1 and FO2 intro movies, the promo art and other advertisment. BOS has been in the posters and movies allways. Deal with it, the final shot even looks similar to FO1 menu background. I really dont consider it as a major design problem or sign of potential threat.

First allow me to thank you for this not authorized links. Secondly, that is clearly not the original FO1 box, seeing how there's PAs from FO2 and FOT on it. Also, the guys in PA in the FO intro are American soldiers - the guy on the box isn't identified, it could be a BOS paladin or a soldier. On the box of FO2 and your other screenshot is a guy wearing the Adv. PA used only by the Conclave, coincidentally a faction central to the plot of FO2, you genius.
The question is if Bethesda will provide any convincing reason why the BOS, a small, local group formed by isolated ex-soldiers, would be present on the east coast.

One is that I simply believe that elements like Turn-Based and Isometric were artifacts of their time.

Gods, give me strength.

Fixed.

maybe the gamebryo engine is incredibly flexible.

It may be that Bethesda isn't.

 

[aries202]

I liked the trailer (teaser). It was better than I expected and actually exceed the expectations I had for the trailer.

The soul and spirit from the old Fallout games certainly were there. And while the teaser didn't show any gamecontent etc. it definitely showed that Bethsoft is capable of making a setting just like the old Fallout games.

 

[Ladonna]

Its a teaser guys....

relax.

Nothing can really be ripped out of this video thats says anything about the game. It was a nice teaser, as Bethesda teasers usually are....but they don't fool me....

 

[Joe Krow]

You could easily remake that "teaser"...

A small shelf of Aylied crystals. One starts to glow. ::que uninspired music selection:: Pan away from the shelf through a small ruin. Gaze in awe at a bench cluttered with calipers, a bottle, etc... Pan out of the ruin into a perpetual forest ::que "epic" music:: Scroll further to a menacing, M-16 wielding, Deadra.

My point?

Oblivion with guns.

 

[Gambler]

Meh. Aren't teasers supposed to interest people somehow? There is nothing in the trailer arrangement and style that isn't copied from F1. Being true to the setting is one thing, being copycat is another.

To summarize, the concept art on the website was okay, and the imagery in the trailer is okay, but substance is lacking, and the "official soundtrack" from the website suck badly. Thus, I don't think Bethesda will slaughter the series, but I do think it will produce something highly unoriginal and uncreative.

 

[Naked Ninja]

@ Section8 : Rabid nitpickers indeed, Gambler here proves my point. Read back through this thread. Now there is a bunch of comments about how they are trying too hard to copy Fallout 1, and this just proves they have no hope. There just isn't any winning scenario for Bethesda here. No matter how that teaser came out, there was a predestined 7 pages of bitching waiting from the Codex.

Holkins was talking about perspective in his post, but I'm not even talking about anything that significant here. People are complaining that the guy in the vid is BOS. Oh no! They've reused one of the previous games factions, the general Codex belief that they have no creativity is confirmed! But I'm willing to bet if they had nothing related to the originals, there would have been bitching about how they are moving away from canon or something.

Admit it. You're all rabid. You're all convinced the game will suck. Nothing can really sway you. It doesn't matter what they show, each new smidgeon of news will result in another 8 pages of nitpicking. Even if it does turn out to be turn based and isometric. You'll find a way to complain about some aspect. The turn based will be "done wrong", or whatever.

If they copy the original setting/game you will complain about it. If they introduce new elements, whether setting or gameplay/input, you'll complain about it. You know it's true, I know its true.

 

[Krafter]

You're all convinced the game will suck.

The signs are all there. The game will not be turn-based, and it will not be isometric, among numerous other things. You know it's true, and we know it's true.

Not too sure how this makes me rabid, though.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Admit it. You're all rabid. You're all convinced the game will suck.

Not really. I think that a lot of people here hope that it will be a decent PA game. Not many people hope that Bethesda will be able/will want to make a decent Fallout game, but can you blame them?

Nothing can really sway you.

Certainly not the intro trailer.

It doesn't matter what they show...

What *have* they shown?

If they copy the original setting/game you will complain about it. If they introduce new elements, whether setting or gameplay/input, you'll complain about it. You know it's true, I know its true.

No, that's what you want to believe in. You don't understand the criticism (you never did, if I'm not mistaken), so you think that we simply hate Bethesda and will hate Beth games no matter what.