Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Interview Informative Fallout 3 interview at Eurogamer

robur

Scholar
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
108
aries202 said:
Again, this misunderstanding about the old Fallouts that it was only about the violence. I'm a little more optimistic about the choice & consequence parts of this game, bit I'm still baffled and amazed over the story in the main plot.

Were' basically stuff with Neesom's character from Star Wars, Qin Gong?? for our dad??
What about Jar-Jar Binks? Can't he be our dad? Then I could finally shoot him.
 

Midwinter

Novice
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Messages
23
Location
Netherlands
What puzzles me is how they're talking about being good or evil (neutral seems to imply ignoring quests and doing nothing). I thought we were getting 'shades of grey'. But maybe I'm reading too much into this... or they just don't know what they're talking about.
 

M0RBUS

Augur
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
206
Midwinter said:
What puzzles me is how they're talking about being good or evil (neutral seems to imply ignoring quests and doing nothing). I thought we were getting 'shades of grey'. But maybe I'm reading too much into this... or they just don't know what they're talking about.
Lol, maybe another subject for an article. Anyway, in MY opinion, Fallout is NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT FUCKING SHMARA NOT about shades of gray in moral questions. It's about different colors. Fucking bethesda don't fucking fucking understand that fucking that! The Witcher is probably going to do that better by forcing the player to choose between different evil outcomes. Yes, because in real world, GOOD doesn't exist. At least to some extent. Look at Vault City vs. New Reno vs. NCR. That moral choice (at least for our aligment) is not good vs. evil vs. neutral, it's about different evils. At least to me. And this kids that call themselves game developers can't freaking get something out of their heads. Just their ass...
 

sheek

Arbiter
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
8,659
Location
Cydonia
pkt-zer0 said:
Fallout 3 shows a joy for violence, but that seems almost in conflict with the good/neutral/evil divide. If you choose to play good, do you play a less violent game, or is it righteous violence?

Gavin Carter: What we can do is provide different avenues for the player. A big thing with the original Fallout is you could talk your way out of certain situations. You could got to the Master and talk him to death. We wanted to provide a lot of different avenues. You have to decide for yourself. Is shooting mutants something my character is going to do? In some ways we'll provide non-lethal combat options, but a big part of this game is the incredible level of violence. It's something people find a lot of fun, so it's not something we're going to back off from. The old Fallout had a slider for violence, you could turn it down if you wanted. We joked that on our options we were going to have one, but it would be taped in place at the max.
Who'd want to talk when you can blow people up with nukes and watch limbs and eyeballs fly?

It should be fucking funny, at least.

I'd be willing to bet Emil hadn't even thought about an alternative karma system before this interview. There are a million solutions, but this 'game designer' (level designer) can't think of or doesn't care about. So they're going to stick to the worst elements of both Fallout and TES, and try to 'balance' them.
 

hakuroshi

Augur
Joined
Oct 30, 2006
Messages
589
GhanBuriGhan said:
1) Sure, hence "get it right"
2) I hate that too. But then Its just part of advertisement, and no more to be taken serious than the promises that my aftershave will make all pretty women go crazy with desire for me.
3) Of course. Realizing that, one could maybe discuss the pros and cons a little more relaxedly, but thats just me, and this is the Codex, so just consider it adding my slightly moderate voice to the hubub.

I would like to support you moderate voice, but unfortunately they worked really hard to become as you put "public enemy #1 of the Codex" and now no amount of good words can restore any trust in them. Especially considering other words they say. If by some miracle of almighty god they manage to make a decent rpg out of this, situation may change. Until then - sorry, no mercy to the enemy :)
 

bossjimbob

Liturgist
Joined
Mar 30, 2003
Messages
225
Lingwe said:
If they really wanted to convince people that they are serious then why not provide some actual examples. I can understand not wanting to ruin the story, but there has to be a couple of side quests where they can say you choose who to deliver the item to (or to keep it for yourself), you can choose to convince the person to join an organisation, or convince him to join another organisation or frame him for a crime and have him arrested, you choose whether to divert the power from somewhere to power up somewhere else or another place entirely again or to leave the origin building powered and turn on the people who are trying to steal the power etc.

Oblivion had a few quests where you could do this. When joining the mages guild, you are asked to retrieve an item for a local guild leader.

http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Oblivion:Chorrol_Recommendation

Granted, the end result was the same: you got the recommendation to move on, but depending on your choices you could have learned a semi-powerful lighting spell, plus the disposition of each NPC would change depending on your choices.

There were others like the Paranoia quest, where you could appease the quest giver to up your reward, or you could cut off the information flow (at which point he'd become hostile). You could also push him to kill the folks he's unnerved by, or help them, or let the guards do the dirty work.

http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Oblivion:Paranoia

My guess is that they're not divulging certain quests right now because they are still writing them up and deciding what stays, what goes, and what gets tweaked. Considering the title is over a year out, it helps not to over promise and under deliver (such is the wicked beast of marketing). After this press flurry I suspect they will go in silent mode and concentrate on development for the next three to six months, with only the occasional screenshot teaser or blurb to keep the game in the back of people's minds.

My point to all of this is that they've done quests like this in the past, so they're likely implementing more in Fallout 3 since the design team is largely unchanged. How well and to what extent they craft them is anybody's guess. We'll have to wait until the game launches to truly know.
 

aries202

Erudite
Joined
Mar 5, 2005
Messages
1,066
Location
Denmark, Europe
robur said:
aries202 said:
Again, this misunderstanding about the old Fallouts that it was only about the violence. I'm a little more optimistic about the choice & consequence parts of this game, bit I'm still baffled and amazed over the story in the main plot.

Were' basically stuff with Neesom's character from Star Wars, Qin Gong?? for our dad??
What about Jar-Jar Binks? Can't he be our dad? Then I could finally shoot him.

No, Jar-Jar Binks can't be your father as you and your father only can be humans. And Jar-Jar Binks isn't human... :D :lol:

More, seriously, though...

I still can't believe the main quest's storyline in Fallout 3. Liam Neeson probably is used to playing father roles by now as he has done this repeatedly now, from Qui Gong to the Father in Love Actually. And why does the Overseer not push you out or throw you out
of Vault 101 when think you have something to do with your father's disapperance??

Maybe we should read something into this line *your father is your compass in life* .
I still don't get it? What your Qi--- eh, I mean, your father, say if you went to the da--- eh, I mean, blew up an entire town, nuked it out of existence. Most father love their sons & duagthers, even if they do something stupid, so I'm sure your father, Liam, will still love you even if you blew up entire towns :( He might not like you, though...

But again, basically we're stuck with a twisted plot between BG1 (Gorion and the search for your father and the Star Wars 3. I'm sorry, but there isn't much originality there...
or innovation...
 

GhanBuriGhan

Erudite
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
1,170
@bossjimbob:
Paranoia was one of the first quests I played in Oblivion, it really got my hopes up. Unfortunately it was an absolute exception. For a TES that level of choice in say 50% of all quests would have been entirely appropriate, in fact I would have been perfectly happy. For a Fallout they will have to do better, though. Long term consequences, branching storylines, etc.
 

Gambler

Augur
Joined
Apr 3, 2006
Messages
767
We wanted the relationship as a central point of the plot, so we don't want you to be able to say, piss off your dad and ruin the plot.
So much for the choices, eh?
Having any kind of storyline deprives you of some hypothetic choices. However, it usually provides you with other choices, which are more meaningful. Granted, the story in F3 sounds... strange... but that's another issue. Did you complain about being exiled from the Vaut 13 in F1? Did you complain about the necessity to search for water chip? You can't change those things, but they are what made the game interesting.
 

bossjimbob

Liturgist
Joined
Mar 30, 2003
Messages
225
GhanBuriGhan said:
@bossjimbob:
Paranoia was one of the first quests I played in Oblivion, it really got my hopes up. Unfortunately it was an absolute exception. For a TES that level of choice in say 50% of all quests would have been entirely appropriate, in fact I would have been perfectly happy. For a Fallout they will have to do better, though. Long term consequences, branching storylines, etc.

True. The majority of Oblivion quests were pretty much the "go here, kill this guy, return to me for a reward" variety. There were a lot of them, so perhaps that's why. They're just easier to crank out by the barrel.

The Shivering Isles expansion did have a branching point where you had to decide which leader to kill, but they were essentially the same type of quest that converged back into the main storyline with little effect. I agree that they should concentrate more on choice with Fallout 3 (though I did enjoy Oblivion for what it was, despite Radiant A.I. having its share of issues).
 

M0RBUS

Augur
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
206
Gambler said:
We wanted the relationship as a central point of the plot, so we don't want you to be able to say, piss off your dad and ruin the plot.
So much for the choices, eh?
Having any kind of storyline deprives you of some hypothetic choices. However, it usually provides you with other choices, which are more meaningful. Granted, the story in F3 sounds... strange... but that's another issue. Did you complain about being exiled from the Vaut 13 in F1? Did you complain about the necessity to search for water chip? You can't change those things, but they are what made the game interesting.
Are they? Wouldn't it be nice if you could refuse to go search the water chip? Then the overseer would have to get another dumbass to go out and search. Wouldn't it be nice to interact with the "other" vault dweller? I still thing THAT limitation is one of the biggest faults of the game...
 

Seboss

Liturgist
Joined
Jan 27, 2006
Messages
947
M0RBUS said:
Are they? Wouldn't it be nice if you could refuse to go search the water chip? Then the overseer would have to get another dumbass to go out and search. Wouldn't it be nice to interact with the "other" vault dweller? I still thing THAT limitation is one of the biggest faults of the game...
Well that's right in theory. In facts, the vault dweller is pretty much the scape goat of Vault 13 and is kicked out. Had BI implemented a choice for the player about this, the result would have been the same anyway. Maybe you could get yourself executed for treason but that would be bit harsh for the very beginning of a game don't you think?
Anyway, that made perfect sense whatever the alignment and personality of your character.

The way Bethesda introduces the main plot of Fallout 3 is hugely different though. The departure of the father being the "most climatic moment of the player character's life" and giving you the urge to leave the vault says a lot about the character personality.
He (or she) may either love his father enough to leave the comfort and security of the vault to go after him or is just curious, he leaves the fault on his own authority.
Fallout 1 just told you "You're out now, deal with it".
In both case, the story is forced on you, but Fallout 1 does it much better IMO.
 

Seboss

Liturgist
Joined
Jan 27, 2006
Messages
947
Ah. Indeed. Unfortunately, my box and manual are long gone by now :(
 

Hazelnut

Erudite
Joined
Dec 17, 2002
Messages
1,490
Location
UK
GhanBuriGhan said:
The part about choice and consequence sounds good. If they actually get that right, its a buy for me.
Well, if they get it right, then it may well be an okay PA RPG-FPS hybrid game, but still not gonna be a respectful Fallout 3 from what information we have received up 'til now. Or would you disagree?

I do find it very interesting that the 'choices & consequences' meme, which I believe (possibly incorrectly) originated from here, has been picked up so strongly by Beth and factors in their hype. Maybe they are actually trying to achieve it to a really deep level, but it's equally likely that they think they are when it's really just part of the empty hype. I think that this truly might be something even the codex 'elders' won't be able to divine before release. (unless spazmo returns along with psychic powers or something :P)


GhanBuriGhan said:
3) Of course. Realizing that, one could maybe discuss the pros and cons a little more relaxedly, but thats just me, and this is the Codex, so just consider it adding my slightly moderate voice to the hubub.

I've been less than my usual moderate self about this recently, but that's because having learned more about the fanbase and history of the franchise over the last 2-3 years, the lack of respect simply makes me mad. As so many people have said before, it wouldn't be a problem if they simply made a PA game or made a spin off thingamajig, which was probably the only saving grace of POS, but they're not. They are making Fallout 3! And from the looks of it they will have (almost) everyone convinced that it's actually a respectful and true sequel to the legacy of Cain et al.
 

DarkUnderlord

Professional Throne Sitter
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2002
Messages
28,390
Hazelnut said:
They are making Fallout 3! And from the looks of it they will have (almost) everyone convinced that it's actually a respectful and true sequel to the legacy of Cain et al.
No, that'll just be the reviews of Fallout 3. It'll be in the Fallout 4 previews where everyone does an about face and mentions the disappointment of Fallout 3, before promising that this time, Fallout 4 will be the true successor. It's what the gaming media do. Case in point: Oblivion.
 

Hazelnut

Erudite
Joined
Dec 17, 2002
Messages
1,490
Location
UK
Brother None said:
Hazelnut said:
which I believe (possibly incorrectly) originated from here

That's probably incorrect.

Oh, well fair enough - I'm not the worlds authority on these things. So from where did it originate then?

(oh, and kudos for your sheer stamina and calm rationality over at the official F3 forums Brother None! Rather impressive, if maybe not as effective at increasing understanding as you'd like)

DarkUnderlord said:
Hazelnut said:
They are making Fallout 3! And from the looks of it they will have (almost) everyone convinced that it's actually a respectful and true sequel to the legacy of Cain et al.
No

No? No to which bit? Ah crap it's nearly 2am and I have a 3yo who's programmed to go off in <5 hours so I'll try and understand it tomorrow.
 

galsiah

Erudite
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,613
Location
Montreal
Brother None said:
Hazelnut said:
which I believe (possibly incorrectly) originated from here
That's probably incorrect.
I googled it for kicks.
"Choices and consequences" came up with hardly anything game related.
"Choices and consequences" RPG came up with:
Increasing Student Engagement by Using Morrowind to Analyze Choices and Consequences

Maya Kadakia said:
A number of educators have been espousing games’ potential to situate learners in deep, meaningful experiences... This study is the first to take a different tack...

It really is quite disturbing. Curse you Brother None.
 

Brother None

inXile Entertainment
Developer
Joined
Jul 11, 2004
Messages
5,673
Hazelnut said:
Oh, well fair enough - I'm not the worlds authority on these things. So from where did it originate then?

I dunno...Tim Cain?
 

Gambler

Augur
Joined
Apr 3, 2006
Messages
767
M0RBUS said:
Are they? Wouldn't it be nice if you could refuse to go search the water chip?
Maybe, maybe not. Depends on the way it would be implemented. However, don't you think that the the list of things that "would be nice" is pretty much infinite? Designers, on the other hand, have limited time and resources, so they have to choose. They can, of course, just choose something, and say that it's good, because they like it. Or they can develop a storyline, and implement things that are relevant to that storyline. That makes designer's choices much less subjective and much more coherent.

Also, without the waterchip part, the main character would have no motivation to do anything, asides from player's desire to be entertained. How can that be good for role playing? A role cannot exist in vacuum, it needs context. Screwing up Necropolis water supply to help your Vault is a meaningful action. Screwing up Necropolis water supply just because it sounds fun is not.
 

spacemoose

Erudite
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Messages
9,632
Location
california
Hazelnut said:
I do find it very interesting that the 'choices & consequences' meme, which I believe (possibly incorrectly) originated from here, has been picked up so strongly by Beth and factors in their hype.

THIS. on the one hand, its flattering that they've been listening. on the other hand, they better had been designing with choices and consequences from the very beginning, otherwise it's just another marketing keyword they've learned to sell their game as something its not.
 

GhanBuriGhan

Erudite
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
1,170
Hazelnut said:
GhanBuriGhan said:
The part about choice and consequence sounds good. If they actually get that right, its a buy for me.
Well, if they get it right, then it may well be an okay PA RPG-FPS hybrid game, but still not gonna be a respectful Fallout 3 from what information we have received up 'til now. Or would you disagree?

I do find it very interesting that the 'choices & consequences' meme, which I believe (possibly incorrectly) originated from here, has been picked up so strongly by Beth and factors in their hype. Maybe they are actually trying to achieve it to a really deep level, but it's equally likely that they think they are when it's really just part of the empty hype. I think that this truly might be something even the codex 'elders' won't be able to divine before release. (unless spazmo returns along with psychic powers or something :P)


GhanBuriGhan said:
3) Of course. Realizing that, one could maybe discuss the pros and cons a little more relaxedly, but thats just me, and this is the Codex, so just consider it adding my slightly moderate voice to the hubub.

I've been less than my usual moderate self about this recently, but that's because having learned more about the fanbase and history of the franchise over the last 2-3 years, the lack of respect simply makes me mad. As so many people have said before, it wouldn't be a problem if they simply made a PA game or made a spin off thingamajig, which was probably the only saving grace of POS, but they're not. They are making Fallout 3! And from the looks of it they will have (almost) everyone convinced that it's actually a respectful and true sequel to the legacy of Cain et al.

Well, there are several apects to it for me. For one, I have a lot of respect for the Fallout fanbase and the franchise itself (although I don't agree with the more rabid outpourings from said fans), and I have supported their requests, mostly because, well, they are the fans, they should have a say.

On the other hand I am a latecomer to Fallout, and although I intellectually appreciate what the game does and is based on, if you'd ask me personally I would probably enjoy a first-person DeusEx like Fallout more than a modernized version of the old game engine. Immersion is a swearword here, but it is important to me, it adds to my enjoyment, and thats why ever since UU I like first person action RPGs. I like the with complex quests and lots of world interaction, and other RPG goodness though, not mainly for the action. I just think that my personal preference isn't that important with regards to Fallout, because I am not a fan that has waited for a decent sequel for the last 10 years. Still, its not personal for me, and anyway, the fans they fight the fight good enough themselves.

A second aspect is that while I agree that it is not a real sequel of Fallout, it "could" be a much better game than Oblivion, from what I heard so far. There I just have a different disposition than most people here, who say: as long as its not proven to be good, it's most likely really really crap, at best a half-assed abomination. I understand that, but thats just not me. I gave them the benefit of the doubt, being critical but positive, before Oblivion, and I gave my opinion after it came out, and a lot of the bad things predicted here turned out to be unfortunately correct... I will hold to the same principle here, because thats how I think it should be done, thats how I would want to be treated if I were a dev. The same applies to any other game or company. Or any other media, really.

A final aspect is that I think a new IP actually has more chance of recapturing what made Fallout great than a Fallout sequel, even if it were done with all the old mechanics intact. A lot of people pointed out that Arcanum (which I havent played yet) is really almost a Fallout game, if you are serious about weighting Gameplay over the setting, as argued by many Fallout fans. And from that point of view I think we have such a game coming, I am talking about AoD of our very own VD, of course. We'll see how it lives up to such expectations, but I think AoD could be enough to satisfy my personal rather minor craving for some good old classic RPG TB gameplay.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom