Game News More Fallout 3 drama

[Vault Dweller]

Go kill yourself, then. All advertisements are embellishments to a degree.

I'm not talking about advertisements. Have no problems with that.

You give the RPG Codex a bad reputation.

Wow, I will take it as a compliment then

Why don't you take your RPG Codex e-mail address and spam "fuck you" letters to everyone in the game industry, for good measure?

I remember a certain pride at some point that we didn't suck up to nobody, were not intimidated, and told things "as they were". What happened to that? Did somebody forgot to send me a memo?

Quite frankly, that's very immature, and immaturity is not something to be proud of.

First, I'm what I'm. Second, that was in response to RP stating that I deserve no respect. That was offensive, and I replied appropriately.

There's a difference between reading something and coming up with stupid conclusions.

True, but I do believe that light sensitivity cancels out isometric view, don't you think? Just like many other statements prove that the game will be neither TB nor isometric.

You mean there would stop bulshitting us?

That's not for you to decide.

But for you?

Then it would be a good idea if you didn't tell everyone to spam Pete Hines

I didn't link his email address, did I?

or resort to petty name-calling just because you seem to have some inane grudge against advertising.

What's advetising got to do with anything?

It would also be nice if you stopped with the bullshit in-site drama.

It would have been even better if you asked me to edit my post instead of doing it yourself. Just for the record, I would have done it then.

 

[Seven]

It would also be nice if you stopped with the bullshit in-site drama.

You're the only hot-head I see around here going around saying what's what even though there's ample evidence to the contrary. Not only that this isn't the first time that you've used/tried to use your admin powers to alter a thread for any reason except that it annoys you.

On a side note, normally I wouldn't comment on in-site stuff like this, but since you brought it why not. BTW, for stuff like isn't this why we have PM's and ICQ, rather than airing stuff out for every one to see?

 

[Seven]

I believe Bethesda practices the "quality product with customer service" business practice. Unlike those companies who just crank out a new football game every year where the only difference is a new roster. Is that what you want for Fallout? The same thing we've played countless times just with some nice new graphics and different characters?

Give them a chance. You may not be as disappointed as you think you will be when it comes out.

I'll grant you everything that you just to avoid an argument. The biggest thing I have a problem with is being dicked around with. Why say that you haven't ruled anything out when when it's quite clear that they have certain ideas that would clash with TB and isometric and will work well in FP and RT. This is my biggest problem, the lies and the subterfuge, so that 3 or 4 months from now they can protend that they gave our suggestions an honest try.

 

[Sol Invictus]

So I guess this means that the stuff in the article was all made up, and that they'll be posting a retraction right?

Don't be such a dimwit. I'm saying that they obviously disclose certain information to different magazines based on their reader base. If the magazine decides to put their own spin on it, as all forms of media do, that's up to them. We do it over here, especially when we label everything in sight as 'shit' with or without evidence, so why not GameInformer?

Your hrad-headedness and ignorance is equallu annoying.

I'd respond if only I knew what hrad-headedness 'equallu' meant.

That's right we can, so piss off if you don't like it.

Oh, so get this: you can whine about something, but nobody else can complain about your incessant whining? Get a life, Hitler.

I guess aiming high, and having standards are over rated, right?

Fallout 2 wasn't exactly the pinnacle of anything and my point wasn't that they shouldn't aim high - it's that all your ranting about how Bethesda is 'destroying Fallout' is utter crap considering the preexistence of FOBOS and FOT. Besides, would Fallout 3 make Fallout any less good. You sound like one of those morons who goes on about how Episode 1 ruined all the Star Wars movies.

The purpose of advertising is usually to create a position reaction, or didn't you know that?

Rewrite this sentence in English next time, and put it through a filter so it makes sense.

If they go about it in an anal way then why not. They're talking out of both sides of their mouth, and you expect us to swallow that, right guess again.

What's so anal about calling their game original and deep? Saying that their game would be the BEST GAME EVER MADE would be anal.

Perhaps we should look your use of profanity in this thread alone. This is the codex if you didn't notice. While we don't accept blantant cussing there are instances when it is warranted. If you don't like then perhaps you should start a new policy beginning by examining your own use of profanity.

Thank you for sharing that session of verbal fellatio on Vault Dweller with everyone else.

My own use of profanity is not at subject here. You should know that you're beginning to sound like a mental invalid. To the point, what's at issue is VD's unnecessary use of not just profanity but an uncalled-for personal attack in his news post. It's all well and good if he wants to refer to Pete Hines as "Pete 'Full-of-Shit' Hines" in replies on the forum but misrepresenting the website as a den of pre-adolescent children isn't good for our image with game developers or anybody else, for that matter.

We're supposed to be offering constructive criticism and advice to game developers, not flinging feces at them. We might as well call ourselves "whinyretards" and paste a bunch of tubgirl images on the front page. At best, we'd become like the GameFAQs forums. At worst, we'd be a poor ripoff of Maddox with tubgirl imagery.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Heh, you girls are funny...

That was unecessarily rude. No one forces you to love company PRs, but at one point I have to wonder what exactly is the point to all this idiotic name calling

Name-calling? I stated a fact. I don't care about PR, but I dislike flat-out lies.

So you're saying speculation is fact? Doesn't it make yourself a liar if it turns out that it's isometric?

It's not about that either, although I'm quote sure that the game is not isometric.

If it ends up isometric, doesn't it mean that you're Vault-fullofshit-Dweller?

That's a big IF, don't you think? Well, to answer your question, if the game turns out isometric, it would mean that I was mistaken. It wouldn't mean that I lied. If you fancy calling me names, be my guest though.

 

[Vault Dweller]

NMA Update:
http://www.nma-fallout.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9523

No, like I said, there are no devs for Fallout 3. Todd is the executive producer for both Oblivion and Fallout 3. Knowing who it is that will be in charge of the project is a bit different than having developers on the team to talk about things they've decided to do, or not to do. Again, those people still don't exist.

The stuff hitting the magazines now was all done at the same time as the online interviews that appeared back when we announced we obtained the rights to Fallout 3, except for the Game Informer bit, which was done a few weeks afterwards.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Give them a chance. You may not be as disappointed as you think you will be when it comes out.

Funny. That's exactly what they used to say about FOBOS.

 

[Seven]

You can pick apart spelling mistakes all you want, but in a discussion like this your focus on that rather than the arguments themselves just reveals your own inability to come up with credable objections. I'lll also point out that all of your counters were based on opinion alone, *YOU* opinion which ain't worth damn to me.

 

[Sol Invictus]

I remember a certain pride at some point that we didn't suck up to nobody, were not intimidated, and told things "as they were". What happened to that? Did somebody forgot to send me a memo?

There's a difference between pointing things out as they are and making broad, sweeping generalizing speculations about a subject based on a couple of sentences in a magazine preview about a game that isn't even in development yet.

First, I'm what I'm. Second, that was in response to RP stating that I deserve no respect. That was offensive, and I replied appropriately.

First, it's "I am what I am", and second, that's a very banal thing to say. Third, you don't deserve respect from anyone who write personal insults about even if what they do does not even affect you directly. It'd be understandable if he burned down your house, but he did not. Do not expect game developers or anyone in the industry to take us seriously if all they can expect in return are harsh tones and childish insults.

True, but I do believe that light sensitivity cancels out isometric view, don't you think? Just like many other statements prove that the game will be neither TB nor isometric.

I don't entirely disagree, as the game could still be in 3rd person perspective. Why does it have to be in first person? Splinter Cell featured light sensitivity when you had your goggles enabled and it wasn't a first person shooter. DirectX8 and 9 graphical filters allow for such things. We're not using DOS anymore. It's also possible, with such graphical filters and gameplay mechanics, to create a reverse flare that causes blindness in certain locations from an isometric viewpoint just like flares create light in Jagged Alliance 2. There's no reason why such flares can't create darkness. I'd call them 'dark sources' or 'blind sources' as opposed to 'light sources'. It's certainly doable with today's visual technology.

But for you?

Excuse me? Please don't turn this into a semantic argument.

I didn't link his email address, did I?

You don't have to supply someone with a gun to have him kill someone.

What's advetising got to do with anything?

Game previews are a form of advertising, in case you've forgotten.

 

[Sol Invictus]

It's also funny that you should mention my supposed 'lack of etiquette'. I don't go around calling you names like Vault 'full-of-shit' Dweller now, do I?

 

[Sol Invictus]

Give them a chance. You may not be as disappointed as you think you will be when it comes out.

Funny. That's exactly what they used to say about FOBOS.

You could say that about every game. We knew FOBOS was going to be crap. It looked like crap from the get-go and all Chuck Cuevas did was insult the fanbase. I don't see Todd or Pete doing that, so why should we treat him the same way? Unlike Cuevas, Bethesda does not deserve that kind of scorn.

 

[Sol Invictus]

You can pick apart spelling mistakes all you want, but in a discussion like this your focus on that rather than the arguments themselves just reveals your own inability to come up with credable objections. I'lll also point out that all of your counters were based on opinion alone, *YOU* opinion which ain't worth damn to me.

So you've been taking spelling lessons from Gromnir, lately, I see.

That said, the only reason I couldn't reply to a couple of your sentences was just as I said: I don't know what the fuck you meant.

You know what you doing take off every zig. For great justice.

 

[Vault Dweller]

It's also funny that you should mention my supposed 'lack of etiquette'. I don't go around calling you names like Vault 'full-of-shit' Dweller now, do I?

Did I call YOU anything? Nope. You see, you and me, the way I see it, are in the same boat. You may not like me, but we do work together sorta. If you felt so strongly that I was out of line, you should have PM'd me, and I would have removed the offensive line myself because you, the guy I "work" with, asked me. Get it now?

 

[jiujitsu]

I believe Bethesda practices the "quality product with customer service" business practice. Unlike those companies who just crank out a new football game every year where the only difference is a new roster. Is that what you want for Fallout? The same thing we've played countless times just with some nice new graphics and different characters?

Give them a chance. You may not be as disappointed as you think you will be when it comes out.

I'll grant you everything that you just to avoid an argument. The biggest thing I have a problem with is being dicked around with. Why say that you haven't ruled anything out when when it's quite clear that they have certain ideas that would clash with TB and isometric and will work well in FP and RT. This is my biggest problem, the lies and the subterfuge, so that 3 or 4 months from now they can protend that they gave our suggestions an honest try.

Yea, I would bet on first person and real time combat at this point. It might still be cool though even if it doesn't have isometric turn-based gameplay. We shouldn't just give up over those things when there is so much more to Fallout(that they can potentially screw up). We should focus on things that aren't a futile request for the game. The industry has changed and Fallout will have to adapted to meet the new expectations. It is still a superior game in many aspects that go beyond what you see when you play. Bethesda may be able to capture that in Fallout 3.

 

[Sol Invictus]

It's also funny that you should mention my supposed 'lack of etiquette'. I don't go around calling you names like Vault 'full-of-shit' Dweller now, do I?

Did I call YOU anything? Nope. You see, you and me, the way I see it, are in the same boat. You may not like me, but we do work together sorta. If you felt so strongly that I was out of line, you should have PM'd me, and I would have removed the offensive line myself because you, the guy I "work" with, asked me. Get it now?

In retrospect I probably should have, so let's not make an issue out of this any more than it is.

 

[Vault Dweller]

There's a difference between pointing things out as they are and making broad, sweeping generalizing speculations about a subject based on a couple of sentences in a magazine preview about a game that isn't even in development yet.

Rex, do you honestly believe that Bethesda bought a license without having a clue what to do with it?

Do not expect game developers or anyone in the industry to take us seriously if all they can expect in return are harsh tones and childish insults.

Yeah, lets kiss some asses and buy some bullshit, so they like us more.

True, but I do believe that light sensitivity cancels out isometric view, don't you think? Just like many other statements prove that the game will be neither TB nor isometric.

I don't entirely disagree, as the game could still be in 3rd person perspective. Why does it have to be in first person? Splinter Cell featured light sensitivity when you had your goggles enabled and it wasn't a first person shooter.

Was it isometric?

But for you?

Excuse me? Please don't turn this into a semantic argument.

Why not? You said it's not for me to decide. I was curious who gets to decide stuff so I can learn from their wisdom.

Game previews are a form of advertising, in case you've forgotten.

And who said I bitched about that preview?

 

[Seven]

Yea, I would bet on first person and real time combat at this point. It might still be cool though even if it doesn't have isometric turn-based gameplay. We shouldn't just give up over those things when there is so much more to Fallout(that they can potentially screw up). We should focus on things that aren't a futile request for the game. The industry has changed and Fallout will have to adapted to meet the new expectations. It is still a superior game in many aspects that go beyond what you see when you play. Bethesda may be able to capture that in Fallout 3.

I'm willing to entertain changes to the mechanics and gameplay of Fallout. However, I'd want certain assurities first that those changes wouldn't botch SPECIAL; I can't see SPECIAL retaining its uniqueness in RT. As for FP vs ISM, well FP in a stat and skill based game creates a bunch of problems. Plus when you throw RT in there, those problems are exacerbated. Of course we still haven't touched upon the myriad of misleading stuff out there that has come as a result of the interviews that Beth has done; if they don't have anything (like they claim) then why create all of this nonsense? You could go with Rex's view of *advertising*, but then you'd have throw out the distinction between and ad and an interview.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Rex, do you honestly believe that Bethesda bought a license without having a clue what to do with it?

You should know that until a game goes into development, nothing is set in stone. The reason why developers don't like to disclose too much information is because they know that there will be some people out there who will nitpick every single word they say and come up with some wild speculations about the final product even before the game has entered into production. Of course they had some clue as to what to do with it, but it doesn't mean they have to tell us all about it, or what they let out even entails the whole of it.

In a way this is very similar to what's going on with Dungeon Siege 2. They've since announced that the game will have roleplaying options, more useful skillsets and a strong storyline and since then, some people on the Codex have managed to deduce that the game will be an interactive screensaver that's even simpler than its predecessor, and that they are lying. I don't know how that makes sense. It's like everyone who's made up their minds on the subject has already concluded what the game will be without having any grasp of evidence to support their belief.

Until the game goes into development and I see some actual screenshots, I'm not going to jump to the conclusion that the game will be a first person shooter.

Yeah, lets kiss some asses and buy some bullshit, so they like us more.

Who said anything about going with the polar opposite of your news post? Life isn't black and white, you know. There's more ways to handle the situation than simply picking one polarized choice over the other.

Was it isometric?

No, but that's besides the point. While I don't have any confidence in the game being isometric, I'm saying that it's not impossible to do. Isometric viewpoints don't automatically consist of 2d graphics with no DX9 filters and shaders whatsoever.

Why not? You said it's not for me to decide. I was curious who gets to decide stuff so I can learn from their wisdom.

It's up to you, as a reporter, to present the evidence, and only the evidence, in objective form. It's not up to you to made wide sweeping generalizations about the game and present them as facts. You're really starting to sound like one of those news reporters on Al-Jazeera who goes on about how evil Jews are because of Israel's bombing of those poor, peaceful, innocent Palestinians and instead of simply saying that it's wrong to bomb innocents, they go on about how Israel and the great Satan aka USA wants to destroy all of Islam.

 

[Sol Invictus]

I'm willing to entertain changes to the mechanics and gameplay of Fallout. However, I'd want certain assurities first that those changes wouldn't botch SPECIAL; I can't see SPECIAL retaining its uniqueness in RT. As for FP vs ISM, well FP in a stat and skill based game creates a bunch of problems. Plus when you throw RT in there, those problems are exacerbated. Of course we still haven't touched upon the myriad of misleading stuff out there that has come as a result of the interviews that Beth has done; if they don't have anything (like they claim) then why create all of this nonsense? You could go with Rex's view of *advertising*, but then you'd have throw out the distinction between and ad and an interview.

The entire Oblivion (and to a small extent Fallout 3) 'interview' wasn't so much an interview as it was an exclusive preview by the GameInformer magazine to sell some copies of itself.

 

[Brillo]

The entire Oblivion (and to a small extent Fallout 3) 'interview' wasn't so much an interview as it was an exclusive preview by the GameInformer magazine to sell some copies of itself.

And to pimp the next gen consoles. Much of the Oblivion preview was about how powerfull the next gen consoles would be, and how Oblivion showed the future of console gaming would be wonderfull(ie. very pretty). Remember that mag's bias (consoles) has got to affect the the shit they wrote about both games.

 

[jiujitsu]

Hey, Brillo, welcome to the codex.

Hopefully, now that the consoles are beefing up, the PC versions of games won't be worse than they should be because the consoles can't handle it.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Welcome to the Codex, and yeah, that's absolutely right, Brillo. We need to look at the interviews in the context of the magazine and its content and not regard it as the sacred tablet of the 10 Commandments.

 

[fnordcircle]

I'm rooting for Vault Dweller because lab tests have proved conclusively that Exitium is, in fact, whiney and not above using his admin powers during a disagreement like Seven said.

 

[FireWolf]

Just a thought, but does the wording of the quote actually imply a first person perspective? From "players will have to train their eyes away from light sensitivity by using a special pair of goggles" say that the actual player has to learn to not look at bright lights? Or does it say that the character has to use goggles immediately after leaving his underground home until his vision adapts to natural light. Could all this fuss be caused by a poorly chosen word of "player" rather than "player character"?

Someone pointed out earlier about the majority vs the minority in terms of marketability of a title. Why, I put to you, does "market appeal" have to be mutually exclusive to "fallout canon"?

I love turn-based combat and stat-based combat modifiers, I love the post apocalypitic pseudo-future environment and the open ended, yet player orientated experience of Fallouts 1 & 2. I didn't enjoy morrowind, perhaps I didn't give it enough of a chance but I felt the worlds were sparsely populated (there were plenty of people, but the dialogue was an exercise in stubburn determination and no mistake) and the less said about the combat the better. I can't see how special could fit into a real-time combat situation intact, especially in a first-person perspective, since Special is about considderation and a myriad of tactical options. However, I have seen an effective combat system where you don't have direct control of your party's (squad's) aim and that's in Full Spectrum Warrior. Not the same type of game, no, but a perspective shift and a more marketable combat system doesn't destroy a game.

I think that at this early a juncture in the game's development this wild speculation and descrying of perceived faults is a fruitless endeavour. You're damning the developers before they've set anything in motion. I think this poor chap was trying to endear himself with the community by mentioning something introduced in the previous Fallouts. Instead he's experiencing what a lot of other developers expect from the "rabid fallout fanbase".

I know you're still hurting from your desires for Troika to have picked up Fallout 3, but damning these people before they've started is just silly. I'm not saying you shouldn't speculate about what a Bethesda employee says in an interview, but perhaps you should take it with a grain of salt. More discussion and less bitching, perhaps?

 

[Seven]

To properly convey the idea/feel of having your eyes adjust to the sun a FP perspective would be best in the gameworld. It doesn't matter whether they said player or player character, it adds up to the same thing in terms of execution.

On a side note, what no lighting in the Vaults. I understand the difference between sunlight and florescent lights, but doesn't this take the idea to the extreme? All because of that little video at the beginninng of FO2?