Interview Pete Hines Q&A about Fallout 3 on GameSpy

[TFVanguard]

as geoff bremer sang: Maginot Line! Maginot Line! Your guns are pointed in the wrong direction!

re: quit being an apologist and use some of your 'cred' to help guide the process. takes the same amount of text and less effort.

I'm not apologizing for Bethesda. I'm just saying that we just don't have the info for which to bitch. If, tommorow, someone says, 'screw SPECIAL, we're going with ES system', then I'll bitch. Until then, it makes more sense to say 'I hope they use X' rather than 'they're not going to use X, because my mind powers say so, so I hate them!'

 

[TFVanguard]

ToEE had all of those, 4th best selling game for Atari last year and beat NWN expansions.

Well, beating expansions isn't really that impressive. Because Atari will point to the top three and say, 'do more like THIS'. I don't agree with the mindset, but it's a terrible pox upon gaming these days.

On turn based you had Silent Storm and the expansion coming soon. And japanese "Movies with a few clicks" so called games really sell a lot in the west. Wait no they don`t, except Final Fantasy, if we`re not talking about GBA.

There aren't many 'movies with a few clicks' anymore. I mean, Final Fantasy isn't that bad. The worst is Xenosaga, certainly, but there's a lot more game in there. And, yeah, they do tend to greatly outsell North American equivalents overall. That may just be a factor on console sales dominanace overall, though.

Best of luck to Bethesda, they´ll need it.

Like I said before, I'm not sure what they gained in getting the name, when their sales likely wouldn't shift much without it - but with a similar theme.

 

[TFVanguard]

i suppose TFV would have a valid argument if referring to console games, however... are there ANY TB console games in this genre? well, that is if you get over the stretch to refer to any console games as crpgs in the first place.

Since we're talking about Fallout 3, console games are relavent...

 

[taks]

you stated "But, seriously, no major publishing house these days will put effort into a 'new-school' RPG that isn't /somehow/ real-time (if pause-based, maybe)"

this statement is valid if you consider consoles, which are nearly all RT and FP based games (at least in the action/rpg genre). i never said anything about relevance. i only said you have to get over the concept of "crpg" on a console, something that is rare at best... if you look at PC based games, this is not true and increasingly a less popular choice of developers...

taks

 

[TFVanguard]

this statement is valid if you consider consoles, which are nearly all RT and FP based games (at least in the action/rpg genre).

Actually, as far as RPGs go, I don't see many RT or FP games available. There are some, yes, but the 'old-skool' style Final Fantasy types still dominate. I would think that this disproves the constant harping on the need for either RT or FP RPGs, yet a lot of publishers refuse to look at anything else.

 

[taks]

i'm not sure where you're going with that since my point is that TB is coming back. nobody in here is harping for RT or FP... i personally prefer ISO views and TB combat these days. the new rpgs that i've seen on the horizon feature mostly ISO views and a majority are slated for TB combat...

taks

 

[triCritical]

I would say that most of the CRPG's and tactical combat games I have played on the PS2 have been TB.

 

[TFVanguard]

i'm not sure where you're going with that since my point is that TB is coming back. nobody in here is harping for RT or FP... i personally prefer ISO views and TB combat these days. the new rpgs that i've seen on the horizon feature mostly ISO views and a majority are slated for TB combat...

I personally prefer 3D situational cameras, and pause-and-play for pacing in combats. I'm not religious about either, mind you, just my preference. I tend to think this will be more or less accepted moving forward - but it depends on the designers.

 

[taks]

get him, tricrit...

taks

 

[triCritical]

I think that its idiotic to believe that RT equals new and TB equals old. That is just not understanding the mechanics of the systems. I have heard so many times that they used TB because no one could do RT given the machines at that time. But that was just BS, I think Arena, Darklands and countless NES RT CRPG's prove that wrong.

A designer needs to ask himself what do I want combat in my CRPG to be like. Do I want it to be fast paced, twitch, online fun like Diablo, or do I want a methodical tactical combat emulation like Silent Storm. While many people would agree that Diablo, or BG style is too watered down for a FO game, and that SS, or JA2 is too tactical, it leaves us with intermediate systems such as the FO systems.

I think some of the pro's to an FO style game that no one really considers is that,

1) FO has very few encounters. So the encounters that you do have should be engaging and smart.

2) FO NPC's, both party members, bystanders and bad guys, should have good AI! This is much easier to do, especially computationally using a TB system.

3) GUNS!!!!! These things can unbalance a game like FO in a hurry. Do it wrong in RT and pseudo RT, and you have Another War. If you have never heard of that game, now you know why.

Finally, the SPECIAL system is sort of riddled in Action Points, and Action Points is some manifold that maps time to video game temporal units based on your attributes. For the current system to remain intact it would be easiest to remain in a TB system. I think Lionheart is a perfect example of what a half assed 18 month implementation will do for combat.

The cons I hear over and over is realism and takes too long.

To realism its quite simple, Morrowind combat is pretty unreal, and pausing to drink 4 potions and change armor is stupid. Not to mention that the mechanics themselves were very limited.

As for it takes to long. Again FO combat is not frequent, and should be substantial. Heck people finished FO1 with never entering combat! Another reason not to waste too many resources making overly tactical. And as long as you don't make tons of tedious enemies like 40 rats, or ants, its not too bad. PoR2 is bad in this respects.

 

[TFVanguard]

I think that its idiotic to believe that RT equals new and TB equals old.

No, but it's a marketing point. Also, there are some advantages to real-time with pause - namely some of the more rediculous turn-based situations that come up, as well as letting some of the 'idle combats' just play out without dragging down the game.

Ideally, there would be an option for full turn play as well, for those nasty fights you really want to micro-manage. It's not easy to implement, comparitively, but it is a nice option to have.

But that was just BS, I think Arena, Darklands and countless NES RT CRPG's prove that wrong.

There was a time that it was night impossible to do real-time RPG systems in the sense that we know them now. But we're not in that time anymore. Of course, that doesn't, by extension, imply that turn-based games are invalid. It really depends on the overall feel that you would be shooting far.

In general, the more encounters you have, the quicker combat needs to be overall. The more 'units' you have, the slower and more precisely-controlled it needs to be. Fallout can skirt between Aurora-style engines and, say, JA2 style engines very nicely. I could personally go either way with it. But I wouldn't want Diablo or Dungeon Siege, certainly - much as I think that Realms of Arkania would be dramatic overkill.

 

[plin]

Thank God most of you aren't designers working on these CRPGS.

 

[Volourn]

"1) FO has very few encounters. So the encounters that you do have should be engaging and smart. "

Define few. It had LOTS of encounters. Lots.


"2) FO NPC's, both party members, bystanders and bad guys, should have good AI! This is much easier to do, especially computationally using a TB system."

Yeah, because we both know that FO's AI was awesome. LMAO


"3) GUNS!!!!! These things can unbalance a game like FO in a hurry. Do it wrong in RT and pseudo RT, and you have Another War. If you have never heard of that game, now you know why. "

True; but so? What's your point here?


Geez. Even when i'm on your side; you still post foolishly. Sad, really.



"Thank God most of you aren't designers working on these CRPGS."

Bringing god into a discussion about games is kinda lame, dontcha think? Pathetic.

 

[triCritical]

Ideally, there would be an option for full turn play as well, for those nasty fights you really want to micro-manage. It's not easy to implement, comparitively, but it is a nice option to have.

Uh micro-manage normally refers to inventory and stuff, and not so much combat, especially for a single character. I mean for a mundane encounter, which I am opposed to, it should be as simple as shoot, or stab, without paying attention. I get through the rats in V13 a lot faster then the would be assasins in BG thanks to high thacO's.

There was a time that it was night impossible to do real-time RPG systems in the sense that we know them now. But we're not in that time anymore. Of course, that doesn't, by extension, imply that turn-based games are invalid. It really depends on the overall feel that you would be shooting far.

Actually I completely disagree. I've talked to ex-BIS programmers that have said as things have progressed the amount of CPU given to things like AI stay the same because graphics always get any extra resources.

 

[triCritical]

Define few. It had LOTS of encounters. Lots.

LOL! My gun-totin rah-rah kill-em all muther fucka character in FO had less then 5% of the my BG2 parties kills! And yes I went without NPC's.

EDIT: I can finish FO without entering combat once, and I still have over 2000 kills in BG2...

Don't be an ass... I mean Volourn.

Yeah, because we both know that FO's AI was awesome. LMAO

Well it wasn't the best. However, it was certainly better then any pause and play CRPG, or for that matter any main stream CRPG that has been released since that time, with noteable exceptions such as the Gothics, and other FPS styled CRPG's, not Morrowind. I would expect an improvement of course, and TB would be the easiest way to get those ever important clock cycles. Not like you understand any of this...

Geez. Even when i'm on your side; you still post foolishly. Sad, really. Sad

This gives me a good reason to change sides.

 

[triCritical]

Thank God most of you aren't designers working on these CRPGS.

LOL you must like shitty games! Tell you what when I ditch my wife and kids, willing to take a pay cut, and work way too many hours, I will go apply for a job at one of the game companies in Irvine.

 

[Volourn]

"My gun-totin rah-rah kill-em all muther fucka character in FO had less then 5% of the my BG2 parties kills! "

Was your gunt totin' character solo or did he have a group that killed many alongside him? Only 5% though? You gotta be jokin'. Once again, I never claimed FO had as much encounters as BG. however, you did use the word few. In my defintion of few; Fo had way more encounters than a few. way more. Only an imbicle.. a Tri woudl think it had few. LOL


"Well it wasn't the best. However, it was certainly better then any pause and play CRPG"

No. FO AI doesn't sue any tatics other than point and shoot. Even the much aligned NWN AI use a variety of tatics, and that's not even counting the vast improvements in the expansions espciailly HOTU. There is no comaprison here. FO AI didn't have AI other than point and click.


"This gives me a good reason to change sides."

Glad I have the power to do that.

 

[triCritical]

Was your gunt totin' character solo or did he have a group that killed many alongside him? Only 5% though? You gotta be jokin'. Once again, I never claimed FO had as much encounters as BG. however, you did use the word few. In my defintion of few; Fo had way more encounters than a few. way more. Only an imbicle.. a Tri woudl think it had few. LOL

LOL, dumbass! You want to argue semantics.

1) I did not say few
2) I said very few.

And yes, very few, does mean something different then a few.

Nice try, pinko.

EDIT: I am no englishionist, but I think there is a difference between a noun, and an adjetive.

No. FO AI doesn't sue any tatics other than point and shoot. Even the much aligned NWN AI use a variety of tatics, and that's not even counting the vast improvements in the expansions espciailly HOTU. There is no comaprison here. FO AI didn't have AI other than point and click.

I am not going to argue this point with a nutter that uses tactics and AI interchangeably.

Glad I have the power to do that.

Whatever keeps you from drowning yourself.

 

[GreenNight]

There was a time that it was night impossible to do real-time RPG systems in the sense that we know them now. But we're not in that time anymore. Of course, that doesn't, by extension, imply that turn-based games are invalid. It really depends on the overall feel that you would be shooting far.

Actually I completely disagree. I've talked to ex-BIS programmers that have said as things have progressed the amount of CPU given to things like AI stay the same because graphics always get any extra resources.

I agree with triCtritical in his disagreement. Even in the 8-bit era there was enough computation power to make real-time games. Those where not RPG not beause lack of resources, but because genres where more pure and they didn't mix them so much as nowadays. Diablo is a Gaunlet with stats, or Gaunlet is a Diablo without them, you choose.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

There was a time that it was night impossible to do real-time RPG systems in the sense that we know them now. But we're not in that time anymore. Of course, that doesn't, by extension, imply that turn-based games are invalid. It really depends on the overall feel that you would be shooting far.

This was when? The time of the ENIAC? There were first person, real time CRPGs back in the 1980s, TFVanguard.

 

[plin]

Thank God most of you aren't designers working on these CRPGS.

LOL you must like shitty games! Tell you what when I ditch my wife and kids, willing to take a pay cut, and work way too many hours, I will go apply for a job at one of the game companies in Irvine.

edit: nevermind, I'm just in a bad mood.

 

[POOPERSCOOPER]

In the gamespy news letter fargo had this to say;

"I'm normally right up on the front lines with the hardest of hardcore gamers, but sometimes I can't understand some peoples' reactions. Take the Fallout fans out there, for instance (and I consider myself a Fallout fan). Yesterday we posted the news that Morrowind developer Bethesda would be making the long-anticipated Fallout sequel. We followed up with this interview.

You can see how people reacted to the news in this forum thread. The backlash is surprising!

In my opinion, I want to give Bethesda a chance. Morrowind was big and very slow moving, but it was open ended, graphically stunning, and damn fun in places. Using that wisdom to create a smaller, tighter, graphically amazing open-ended RPG in the Fallout universe could be a real winner in my book. Some skepticism is good, but I want to at least give them the opportunity to show their stuff. Stick around for more updates!" -Fargo

They are refering to this thread on their forums: http://www.forumplanet.com/gamespy/topic.asp?fid=1422&tid=1419683

 

[Transcendent One]

One of the things I never understood is why fans can't spell "Morrowind".

 

[triCritical]

There was a time that it was night impossible to do real-time RPG systems in the sense that we know them now. But we're not in that time anymore. Of course, that doesn't, by extension, imply that turn-based games are invalid. It really depends on the overall feel that you would be shooting far.

Actually I completely disagree. I've talked to ex-BIS programmers that have said as things have progressed the amount of CPU given to things like AI stay the same because graphics always get any extra resources.

I agree with triCtritical in his disagreement. Even in the 8-bit era there was enough computation power to make real-time games. Those where not RPG not beause lack of resources, but because genres where more pure and they didn't mix them so much as nowadays. Diablo is a Gaunlet with stats, or Gaunlet is a Diablo without them, you choose.

You raise an interesting point. For instance, back then CRPG's really did market to only a small niche crowd. Not to mention that they were much cheaper to make as well. Right now we live in an era of big budget games, where it is cost some of the more high profile games up to 20 dollars a unit to make. :shock: In an era like this where games are costing record amounts to make, everything is top notch, it is no wonder why they are trying to reach crowds that have never played a RPG, and hence can't fathom the idea of turn based combat.

They typically discuss this stuff over a game of RISK, or Chess of course.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

In the gamespy news letter fargo had this to say;

"I'm normally right up on the front lines with the hardest of hardcore gamers, but sometimes I can't understand some peoples' reactions. Take the Fallout fans out there, for instance (and I consider myself a Fallout fan). Yesterday we posted the news that Morrowind developer Bethesda would be making the long-anticipated Fallout sequel. We followed up with this interview.

You can see how people reacted to the news in this forum thread. The backlash is surprising!

In my opinion, I want to give Bethesda a chance. Morrowind was big and very slow moving, but it was open ended, graphically stunning, and damn fun in places. Using that wisdom to create a smaller, tighter, graphically amazing open-ended RPG in the Fallout universe could be a real winner in my book. Some skepticism is good, but I want to at least give them the opportunity to show their stuff. Stick around for more updates!" -Fargo

They are refering to this thread on their forums: http://www.forumplanet.com/gamespy/topic.asp?fid=1422&tid=1419683

Here's what Fargo really means to say:

• I'm normally in the front of the line to paint myself as a hardcore gamer because it's easier to buy gamespy products from a fellow gamer than some corporate drone. As a drone, though, I can't understand gamers' reactions. Take the Fallout fans for instance, who've been told they should be happy with crappy spin offs for the last several years rather than a real sequel to Fallout RPGs(BUY MORE GAMESPY T-SHIRTS!). Yesterday, Pete Hines mailed us an announcement with his phone number on it, so we called him up and asked a bunch of questions and put it on our site quickly in hopes that you guys would buy some GameSpy stuff after you read it.
  
  You can see how potential customers reacted in this thread. They're too pissed to buy a baseball hat with our logo.
  
  In my opinion, I'll sell lots more gamespy thongs and hippacks if I get more exclusives from Bethesda. Morrowind sold a lot of copies, so there should be a lot of people who liked the game. If Bethesda adds a multiplayer mode, maybe they'll license our GameSpy technology. Some skeptism is good, but that doesn't make me any money. I hope Bethesda gives me some screenshots so people will come and stop by our online store. Stick around for more updates, and buy some GameSpy sunglasses in the meantime!
  -Faggo