Interview Pete Hines on Fallout 3

[Country_Gravy]

You know ... Fallout 1 had no sexual content outside a prostitute in one of the towns that never allowed the Vault Dweller the use of her services, sexual content really started in FO2 so its really a no question and that just shows how Bethsoft knows the Fallout license if they are dismissing it like that.

You made some great points about the logical design of things in Oblivion....if we use logical thought. In an economically desolate world....prostitution and crime looms large.

You can roleplay that your character had sex with everyone including your horse in its nice shiny armor.

 

[gc051360]

You can roleplay that your character had sex with everyone including your horse in its nice shiny armor.

How could I forget???

Use your imagination has to be right up there with "Of course it is an RPG...you play a role right??"" Or "If you don't like the game....why are you talking about it...only those who like the game can criticize it"

 

[MisterStone]

You know ... Fallout 1 had no sexual content outside a prostitute in one of the towns that never allowed the Vault Dweller the use of her services, sexual content really started in FO2 so its really a no question and that just shows how Bethsoft knows the Fallout license if they are dismissing it like that.

The whole sex/prostitution thing is a straw man. There are plenty of other things that will be gone from this game, which you will probably miss. Here is a list of a few things I can think of... feel free to add on.

- Drug use. (no way in HELL those poons are going to have drug use in this high profile game. If they do, it will just be some kind of magic pill that gives you a boost followed by penalties- no inhalers, needles, etc. Hell, they probably won't even have moonshine...)

- Children. (If it is even possible to kill a child, it won't fly it won't fly with Bethesda. The media and various attention whores love to point to stuff like that and blow it way out of proportion. In the world of Fallout 3, radiation will have fried everyone's nads, and there will be no children.)

- The opportunity to do truly evil things such as sell people into slavery

- (insert features here)

 

[kingcomrade]

Fallout 1 had no sexual content outside a prostitute in one of the towns that never allowed the Vault Dweller the use of her services

Huh? You can use the prostitute in Junktown and there is the chick in the Red Caravan office that you can sleep with if you stats are good enough (she gives you free drugs afterwards). Don't take this as a defense of Fallout 2, if you do a search for my name for, "Fallout 2 is boring" you will find a post which has a compiled list of all the people you can sleep with in FO2 and complaints about how lame it all was.

 

[The Rambling Sage]

^In economically poor situations....like what would be the case if the world ended....prostitution goes up. Crime goes up. Drug use goes up. Everything bad goes up. Violent dictator like leaders rise, usually with much popular support. Crime lords would be everywhere. Slavery, rape, murder, would all be present. But Bethesda doesn't care about logic, or being realistic. They are all about the scenery.

Leaving aside the fact that you are calling "realistic" something based around something that never has happened, and whose conventions were based on being a game. Those conventions, in the first Fallout game, were actually well developed and could be rationalized inside the setting. In the second one, the conventions became more of a way to tell jokes or be controversial: Cities that were there just because, without a rationale to their existance. Conflicts that were there just because, without a rationale relating those to the setting. Even the main plot in this second game was retarded, even if it tried to be funny or witty or whatever. It was just dumb, and more related to our setting than the fallout one.

In fact, the entire vice ridden setting in wich the fallout setting turned on the second game is illogical in itself. They were taking, basicly, things we consider wrong in our society and making the world around this (to the point of making "themed cities") without considering the world in wich this is based, the way it could evolve, and, in fact, acting like everyone still thought like when our society was around, but seeing a radscopion once in a while (horrible creatures!). Adaptation to the enviroment? They just continued thinking as we do, organizing themselves as we do, and acting like we do, while the entire enviroment and context that makes us think, organize, and act like we do did not longer exist - More so, it had been changed for a different one. And that when already several generations had come and go. Compared with the first one, Fallout 2 was not only immature, but lost a lot of the "soul" of the setting as well.

So, yeah. Defend those things you like in the game as much as you want, but do not try to bring some ramshackle claims of logic, realism, and deep insight into human nature as an evidence. Say "It was cool by this and this" and leave it at that.

The only reason they wanted to make Fallout was to have an excuse for wide landscapes with not much going on besides looking at the rocks. "What do you expect....it's the end of the world.

Now, that is a point i can relate to.

And now they are dismissing sexual content as "cheesy" or "cliche" or "just trying to be controversial" no...just trying to be realistic. In a post apocalyptic wasteland...there would be whores. Filthy diseased whores. And strongmen seizing control of towns. And organized revolts against that strong man in favor of another. And these same warlords ransacking other towns...a post apocalyptic wasteland...is not a pg-13 type of place.

So, let me get this: You are saying so because...? What? It doesn't compute.

Now, on the just trying to be controversial, on the other side: take the first fallout game. Yes, it was b-movie stuff, but had a coherent design, and was not too overblown. Now, see the entire set of changes the setting suffered from the first one to the second one? Of wich kind were they?

Yes, not just the cheesy and the controversial, but the cheesy and the controversial that had not direct relationship to the setting as it was developed originally. An example: In the first game, you had organized settlements with some particular characteristics, and then small groups of raiders living outside the reach of those. In the second one you have western town, vegas town, little china vs the scientologists town, fascist town, racial cleansing town, slaver town, cute "cargo cult" town, et cetera. Oh, and the Enclave. Do not even get me started on the Enclave.

Without entering in the philosophical, societal, and scientifical part of the discussion, or in your claim of knowing how a post-apoliptic society would work, not a small part of setting integrity was lost in the translation, and what did the setting got out of this? Becoming cheesy, controversial just for the sake of it, and dumb.

You made some great points about the logical design of things in Oblivion....if we use logical thought. In an economically desolate world....prostitution and crime looms large.

If you say so.

And stop it with all those ellipsises, for the love of the flying spaghetti monster. They break the timing and rythm of the phrase, as you are using it, and add nothing but confusion and ambiguety.

 

[Amasius]

- Children. (If it is even possible to kill a child, it won't fly it won't fly with Bethesda. The media and various attention whores love to point to stuff like that and blow it way out of proportion. In the world of Fallout 3, radiation will have fried everyone's nads, and there will be no children.)

So everybody is a Supermutant in FO3? Cool.

 

[gc051360]

Compared with the first one, Fallout 2 was not only immature, but lost a lot of the "soul" of the setting as well.

I think it is well documented that Fallout 2 had too many pop culture references, and it's setting wasn't as believable.

Say "It was cool by this and this" and leave it at that

No. Post-apocalypse, prostitution is still alive and well. If the world economy crumbles, and everyone is in economically destitute situations.....what do you believe it would be like. I gurantee you it wouldn't be rated pg-13.

Now, that is a point i can relate to.

Yes. I am a genius.

or in your claim of knowing how a post-apoliptic society would work

It's not just a claim I made up. In economically poor situations, what happens? Throughout history what has happened? In war torn parts of countries what happens? In places where there is no work to be had, and nothing but despair what happens?

And stop it with all those ellipsises,

Fine.....I'll stop...if you say so. I don't mean the sentences to flow together, it's more fractured thoughts when I use those.


Also. I thought of something. I know what will be in the Bethesda Fallout. Psychics. Some gov't. agency was developing psychics to be used as weapons. I thought of what would be the lamest plot device and this is what I came up with. Write it down, I'd put money on this one.

 

[The Rambling Sage]

No. Post-apocalypse, prostitution is still alive and well. If the world economy crumbles, and everyone is in economically destitute situations.....what do you believe it would be like. I gurantee you it wouldn't be rated pg-13.

Oh, i never said it would be pg-13. It just said you were coming to it from the wrong direction, and that talking about "realistic" was out of place.

And i didn't say prostitution wouldn't be alive and well. I just pointed that what you were considering, or at least seemingly considering, realistic was a cheesy, underdeveloped take on such topic, and thus not deserving to be part of a backing you seemed to be trying to base on realism.

It's not just a claim I made up. In economically poor situations, what happens? Throughout history what has happened? In war torn parts of countries what happens? In places where there is no work to be had, and nothing but despair what happens?

You are developing that point on a quite weird way. First, for an "economically poor situation" to arise, you still need a developed economy. In a post-apocaliptic setting, were the civilization that made such a developed economy possible was reduced to cinders, it becomes a civilization of survival, and not of economy in a capitalist way, wich you are implying.

For real world examples, there are several self-contained cultures living in extreme situations, both ancient and modern, that developed an entirely different worldview on wealth, community, and trade than the western civilization. Most tribal societies, or nomad ones, also developed an entirely different societal basis to wealth and colaboration, more different of our own as more harsh were the conditions. With the development of stablished civilization, industry, and ways to make the enviroment less unfriendly to survival, those viewpoints shifted to a more "wealth and progress" based mindset.

With stablished civilization in ruins, the enviroment turned into a death trap, a new ecosystem where man is no longer the more adapted predator, a lack of resources, and a much smaller population, it is more possible that humanity would "regress" to a primal way to view wealth, resources, and community than to continue with an economical model that began developing after mankind managed to settle down. And, since mankind would not be the only creatures affected by a nuclear collapse and a new, different enviroment would greatly damage, in an amount time too short for adaptation, the systems most species need to survive, the situation would be even worse to what i explained already, and thus a "regression" to nomad/tribal mindsets would be not only an option, but almost a necesity.

So, after such a basic analisis (we can go on with this in private messages, if you want a more detailed and backed up analisis) i think it is reasonable to say than your take on "realism" is not realistic, at best.

[edit] Your take would be correct in a collapse that destroyed a culture, but left most of the infrastructure and enviroment like it was, like the fall of the roman empire. But with no infrastructure, no enviroment to wich we are adapted, and no resources to maintain what little infrastructure is left, it would be almost "back to square one" - With a much different take on wealth, leadership, and just living.

[edit2] Consider it also that if we are talking about disaster areas, warzones, et al, we have to talk about hysteria. In this case, we are talking about a world were such period already passed by generations ago.

Also. I thought of something. I know what will be in the Bethesda Fallout. Psychics. Some gov't. agency was developing psychics to be used as weapons. I thought of what would be the lamest plot device and this is what I came up with. Write it down, I'd put money on this one.

Oh, a magick system for fallout! Since this is Beth we are talking about, i am willing to bet on that one too.

And hey, do not take my posts like i am attacking you. I am a bit confrontational, but it is just the way i write, not that i am really "attacking" you or your ideas. Just my take on what you said, and why i think it was wrong.

 

[gc051360]

Oh, i never said it would be pg-13. It just said you were coming to it from the wrong direction, and that talking about "realistic" was out of place.

It's realistic in the sense that it needs to make sense within the setting.

I just pointed that what you were considering, or at least seemingly considering, realistic was a cheesy, underdeveloped take on such topic, and thus not deserving to be part of a backing you seemed to be trying to base on realism.

The cartoon takes on cities needs not be in there. There doesn't need to be a vegas, a chinatown. I thought the Den was cool. That was my favorite location in Fallout 2. A lot of the other ones did have a cheese factor. But if Bethesda gets that close, I won't complain.

First, for an "economically poor situation" to arise, you still need a developed economy. In a post-apocaliptic setting, were the civilization that made such a developed economy possible was reduced to cinders, it becomes a civilization of survival, and not of economy in a capitalist way, wich you are implying.

Yes. It is a civilization of survival. But bottom line is people's lives suck. And certain things have always arisen during times when people's lives have sucked.

You seem to suggest that if a nuclear holocaust happened, rather than humanity rebuilding in civilizations, they would revert to a nomad type culture? More along the lines of hunter gatherer type stuff?

oops. I see you'd rather take it to PM's. alright.

And hey, do not take my posts like i am attacking you.

I am not a pussy. Jesus. I'll pm some thoughts tomorrow.

 

[Ivy Mike]

So, after such a basic analisis (we can go on with this in private messages, if you want a more detailed and backed up analisis)

Yes, going private with this seems like a good idea. Some things are best left in private. Also, make sure to give Major Blackheart a call.

Going back to the interview: There are some small quotes here and there that actually bring a glimmer of hope to the table. But the point isn't what they (he) says but what they deliver - and Puuk is probably right on the mark on this one. This is already turning out to be the Oblivion pre-release hype all over again. I'm waiting for the flood of (still loyal, if there are any) ESF refugees to come over and drown us in Pete Hines quotes and promises.

 

[The Rambling Sage]

oops. I see you'd rather take it to PM's. alright.

Just so we do not bother the rest and hijack this topic. Already sent.

I am not a pussy. Jesus.

I did not say you were. I was just being civil.

Yes, going private with this seems like a good idea. Some things are best left in private. Also, make sure to give Major Blackheart a call.

You can come too if you want, Ivy :wink:

 

[Ahzaruuk]

The only thing that interests me in Fallout is the whole drama surrounding it.

Pete, the disgruntled fans...there's enough here for a bloody soap opera.

 

[Texas Red]

The only thing that interests me in Fallout is the whole drama surrounding it.

Pete, the disgruntled fans...there's enough here for a bloody soap opera.

But you *were* an Oblivion fanboy! How can you not wait to play Fallout 3?

 

[Slaytanic]

Let's give the Beth devs either aids or cancer with out brains, that way MAYBE they will have a concience crysis and decide to not sell out so badly thus making at least something decent ( mind you, at least something decent by THEIR crappy standards, if they have any).

 

[Elhoim]

Who is going to be the big Foozle in this one? Any takers?

Probably the Chinese. Everybody is doing it.

No, I think that the Iranians will be the ones. Maybe they were the ones that started the war.

 

[Julio]

Let's give the Beth devs either aids or cancer with out brains, that way MAYBE they will have a concience crysis and decide to not sell out so badly thus making at least something decent ( mind you, at least something decent by THEIR crappy standards, if they have any).

wut

 

[Section8]

Who is going to be the big Foozle in this one? Any takers?

Probably the Chinese. Everybody is doing it.

No, I think that the Iranians will be the ones. Maybe they were the ones that started the war.

Odds on the Fallout 3 timeline starting from the present day? Anyone?

 

[Elwro]

Re: Bang bang on the door, baby.

I remember females can have sex with Metzger to get him to drop the price on Vic.I always just stole his shotgun and shot him in the eyes with it.

I remember how smart I felt when I thought of planting ticking dynamite on Metzger. I ran... and then the game crashed.

 

[bonch]

The most worrying aspect of Pete Hines' comments is how he's already predicting mixed reactions before the game is even out. This means Bethesda is very set on doing things their own way rather than making a true Fallout 3. Another Xbox 360 first-person shooter with stats. Sigh.

 

[Cimmerian Nights]

The most worrying aspect of Pete Hines' comments is how he's already predicting mixed reactions before the game is even out.

Yeah it's like he's starting to give up already. I kind of had an admiration for him to be able to stick with his lies for so long, kind of like a Presidiential Press Secretary. I was hoping we could have more fun with him before we break him.

 

[gc051360]

^^Most likely it has to do with every FO 3 message board being very negative. And most Fallouit fans condemning Bethesda. So he has stated "this is our game, we are making it for us, not you" us of course means bethesda and their hordes of xbox kiddies.

 

[kingcomrade]

Odds on the Fallout 3 timeline starting from the present day?

After the tutorial which takes place at Normandy Beach.


...ugh, I can just see the corny supar-dramatic nuclear holocaust scene which will have even less plausibility than Oblivion's opening vignette. How much you want to bet that they ignore Fallout canon and go for nuclear missile strikes (rather than bomber attacks) and yet still keep the air raid sirens for dramatic flair?

 

[Seboss]

I really look forward to seeing what kind of spiffy minigames they'll stuff in that.

 

[kingcomrade]

Heh, Missile Defense minigame for dialogue.

 

[Veracity]

Fallout 2 was certainly overburdened with such material, but my own admittedly vague recollection of Fallout was that it was hardly averse to trying rather too hard in a similar vein.

Care to be less specific?

Not sure if you're being facetious or meant 'more', but if you meant 'more', and skipping stuff I'm sure was from the sequel (lots of New Reno, tribals, gimp nonsense) what I remember finding grating are people regularly exploding into giblet showers (for which there was even a perk, wasn't there?), sweary shouting in combat text pop-ups, and some cheesy shotgun wedding. The shotgun wedding was probably Fallout 2, but I'm not sure; the sweary shouting was certainly more over-the-top in the sequel, but I think the first had it; and the giblets were definitely in both. The setting as a whole teetered between kitsch and grit in a way that never really clicked with me - I don't think I can usefully come up with specific examples of that, since it's too much an overall impression. As I said, my recollection of the first game is hazy as hell, since I haven't replayed it since it was fairly new. The sequel I played more recently on a budget re-release, though still some years back, so the version of the series in my head probably owes more to it than to the original.