Game News RobG on Fallout and Bethesda

[DarkUnderlord]

Re: um

I guess what makes me different from many here is im one of the bulk of game fans and not one of the more detail oriented fans. When I liked star wars I still didnt know much about any of its details. When I loved autodual I still didnt remember how all of it worked. And while I love fallout I dont realy remember everything about it and just love the setting and the way it felt at least somewhat like I was in a post apocalytic wasteland.

In short: You don't care either way. We do. You're going to play it and love it regardless. We want certain things which to us, are a small (but crucial) part of that overall 'Fallout feeling'.

Now if you're going to play it regardless, why wouldn't you accept turn-based combat and an isometric view?

 

[Amerestatistic]

Re: um

I guess what makes me different from many here is im one of the bulk of game fans and not one of the more detail oriented fans. When I liked star wars I still didnt know much about any of its details. When I loved autodual I still didnt remember how all of it worked. And while I love fallout I dont realy remember everything about it and just love the setting and the way it felt at least somewhat like I was in a post apocalytic wasteland.

In short: You don't care either way. We do. You're going to play it and love it regardless.

ow if you're going to play it regardless, why wouldn't you accept turn-based combat and an isometric view?

Here's an argument that sounds weird at first perhaps but think about it: If you don't personally care all that much, why not still support TB and such in the name of diversity? The TB CRPG seems to be a dying breed, after all, and I think we can probably agree that we're better off with more diversity in the industry, not less.


I'd also like to ask whatever Bethesda fans are still visiting this site this: Don't you think it would benefit Bethesda as a company to consider leaving their comfort zone for this one?

EDIT: Before anyone yells at me for assuming I know what they're going to do, you do know they've officially gone on record as saying they probably won't do what they're not good at, i.e. isometric "Baldur's Gate"-style games, indicating that there must be a conservative attitude in the company? Just being sure...

 

[wintermane]

Re: um

I guess what makes me different from many here is im one of the bulk of game fans and not one of the more detail oriented fans. When I liked star wars I still didnt know much about any of its details. When I loved autodual I still didnt remember how all of it worked. And while I love fallout I dont realy remember everything about it and just love the setting and the way it felt at least somewhat like I was in a post apocalytic wasteland.

In short: You don't care either way. We do. You're going to play it and love it regardless. We want certain things which to us, are a small (but crucial) part of that overall 'Fallout feeling'.

Now if you're going to play it regardless, why wouldn't you accept turn-based combat and an isometric view?

Because I fear its more likely to be the last fallout game if they try for that.

 

[wintermane]

Re: um

I guess what makes me different from many here is im one of the bulk of game fans and not one of the more detail oriented fans. When I liked star wars I still didnt know much about any of its details. When I loved autodual I still didnt remember how all of it worked. And while I love fallout I dont realy remember everything about it and just love the setting and the way it felt at least somewhat like I was in a post apocalytic wasteland.

In short: You don't care either way. We do. You're going to play it and love it regardless. We want certain things which to us, are a small (but crucial) part of that overall 'Fallout feeling'.

Now if you're going to play it regardless, why wouldn't you accept turn-based combat and an isometric view?

Because I fear its more likely to be the last fallout game if they try for that.

 

[Amerestatistic]

It seems to me that they have a pretty guaranteed audience of people who remember the old Fallout games+people who like Bethesda games.

I don't really get this however, I'm not a person who hates or loves Bethesda (I've just never been that interested in them) but if they've won so many game of the year awards and received so many glowing reviews, what does that say about the people who hand these things out if Bethesda can't do something risky and still make a game people want to play? Why aren't they capable of doing something different-and succeeding?

It's confusing to me, honestly.

 

[Shevek]

Funny thing is isometric tb games that have come out recently havent done badly. ToEE, despite its bugs, did alright. Silent Storm did well enough for them to go for a sequel. Plenty of TB games are on the horizon (Power of Law, a couple Jagged Alliance games, etc). The notion that TB would sink the FO series is unsupported by the evidence. If anything, FOBoS, the actiony FO, should prove the foibles in moving away from what works with FO (as it tanked very badly and nearly did end FO as a property).

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Re: um

Kind of like your trigger happy bannings over at NMA recently. "ah shit, he's got a different opinion than us. HES FLAME BAITING, BAN EM". Piss off prick.

You might want to rethink that. The bans you see at NMA all have their reasons, but they don't include having a different opinion. Difference in opinion is not the issue; registering solely to repeat what has already been discusses incessantly, and registering solely to troll are the issue.

 

[Raymondo]

Like Worms HL, a turned based mod.

Worms' turn based system and Fallout's turn based system are completely different. Worms' turn based system has no prefixed movement; it uses a timer to limit the player's movement, whereas Fallout uses a more traditional hex-based movement system.

 

[IClaudius]

I kind of sympathise with the contestation over TB & the iso perspective given my fond memories of time spent with the Fallout franchise; however, I think some of the histrionics displayed here go a little far. IMO it wouldn't be the end of the world if they nonetheless put serious effort into arguably more pivotal CRPG elements.

Indeed, to this end I would have thought codex types would be more focused on Bethesda's capability to design decent dialogue, capture Fallout's nior humour, have challenging tactical combat, interesting & varied non-fedex quests, memorable NPCs / companions, and a dynamic reactive world worth spend more than a couple of hours in. Aren't these things of substance more important than those of mere form? I mean seriously Morrowind must be one of the most boring, unbalanced, lifeless, overrated & muchkin RPGs of all time and it certainly wasn't because it was first person...That game is so crap compared to both Gothics it isn't funny. Now the mechanics of the SPECIAL system are a different matter, but there isn't enough information to know what they will do there one way or another.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Indeed, to this end I would have thought codex types would be more focused on Bethesda's:

• capability to design decent dialogue,
• capture Fallout's nior humour,
• have challenging tactical combat, <-- TB System Discussion
• interesting & varied non-fedex quests,
• memorable NPCs / companions,
• and a dynamic reactive world worth spend more than a couple of hours in.

A few people are apparently working on writing something up / talking to Bethesda about all of that. However, those things have been mentioned. It's just that TB and ISO view are the two things Bethesda employees keep putting their foots in their mouths about. They're also fundamental design decisions that will be made within the next couple of weeks. The rest goes from there.

You do have a point though and believe me, they are all concerns we (or at least I) have.

 

[mr. lamat]

You might want to rethink that. The bans you see at NMA all have their reasons, but they don't include having a different opinion. Difference in opinion is not the issue; registering solely to repeat what has already been discusses incessantly, and registering solely to troll are the issue.

someone comes there with a different opinion, a tonne of spunkmonkeys jump all over him/her for that opinion and start a flamewar. the person with the differring opinion gets banned for not taking the insults with good humour.

it's a sad-ass webboard with some nasty group-think going on that should be forgotten when the bethesda boards open up.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

someone comes there with a different opinion, a tonne of spunkmonkeys jump all over him/her for that opinion and start a flamewar. the person with the differring opinion gets banned for not taking the insults with good humour.

Explain to me why some people with differing opinions still stand there?

Lamat, the board received a high flux of posters recently who simply registered to create trolling threads, or that did not read the forum guidelines and created threads just to say how NMAers were wrong, and how they should give Bethesda a chance. This, after countless other posts on the same subject have been made.

 

[Briosafreak]

You might want to rethink that. The bans you see at NMA all have their reasons, but they don't include having a different opinion. Difference in opinion is not the issue; registering solely to repeat what has already been discusses incessantly, and registering solely to troll are the issue.

someone comes there with a different opinion, a tonne of spunkmonkeys jump all over him/her for that opinion and start a flamewar. the person with the differring opinion gets banned for not taking the insults with good humour.

it's a sad-ass webboard with some nasty group-think going on that should be forgotten when the bethesda boards open up.

NMA had groups setting up ways to troll all over the forums from penny arcade
http://www.penny-arcade.com/forums/view ... &start=450
and the SA, in this last case they filled the forum with goatse (how old is that?...) so a no toleration system was put in place, for a couple of days. And call it group-thinking is , well, ridiculous, since it`s in fact a group, in the sense of a web community, but with diferent views on the subjects.

Btw if you go there try to find the discussion between Sawyer and Saint going on, quite entertaining.

 

[Spazmo]

One thing I like about NMA is that when people think "HEY LET'S GO TROLL SOME FALLOUT FANBOYS", they think NMA instead of RPG Codex.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

And call it group-thinking is , well, ridiculous, since it`s in fact a group, in the sense of a web community, but with diferent views on the subjects.

This is one of the things that irks me the most. I forget how many times i've repeated this to certain people, that there's no hive mind or anything like it. People disagree with each other, people have different opinions, hell, this is seen in the General Discussion forums where people debate politics, religion and whatnot. No one is banned there simply for having a different opinion. If this was true, then many people would have been banned multiple times already.

 

[Seven]

Indeed, to this end I would have thought codex types would be more focused on Bethesda's capability to design decent dialogue, capture Fallout's nior humour, have challenging tactical combat, interesting & varied non-fedex quests, memorable NPCs / companions, and a dynamic reactive world worth spend more than a couple of hours in. Aren't these things of substance more important than those of mere form?

Oh, you see we already know that they suck at *those* things, so they our only hope is the mechanics.

 

[plin]

Like Worms HL, a turned based mod.

Worms' turn based system and Fallout's turn based system are completely different. Worms' turn based system has no prefixed movement; it uses a timer to limit the player's movement, whereas Fallout uses a more traditional hex-based movement system.

It's just a simple example friend. If a little amateur french mod group can make turn-based out of out-dated tech like that, I don't see why professionals couldn't do that (but of cource much more complex) to their own tech, which since they are making a new engine, it's probably pretty new and good technology.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Indeed, to this end I would have thought codex types would be more focused on Bethesda's capability to design decent dialogue, capture Fallout's nior humour, have challenging tactical combat, interesting & varied non-fedex quests, memorable NPCs / companions, and a dynamic reactive world worth spend more than a couple of hours in. Aren't these things of substance more important than those of mere form?

Those things have to be built on the basics first. Those basically would be including the isometric view, the turn based, the dialogue trees, and the Fallout character system. Without the dialogue trees, you can't really do a speech skill well, you can't do the low intelligence dialogue at all, you lose a lot of the nior humor, and so forth. That's why the basics must be done.

 

[StraitLacedDeviant]

NMA had groups setting up ways to troll all over the forums from penny arcade
http://www.penny-arcade.com/forums/view ... &start=450
and the SA, in this last case they filled the forum with goatse (how old is that?...) so a no toleration system was put in place, for a couple of days. And call it group-thinking is , well, ridiculous, since it`s in fact a group, in the sense of a web community, but with diferent views on the subjects.

Btw if you go there try to find the discussion between Sawyer and Saint going on, quite entertaining.

I think that is just classic, they are insulting the fallout community while using their own board to plan troll attacks on NMA. I almost set up an account just to explain TEH IRONY!!1! to them. I have never seen anyone at either codex or nma maliciously plan an attack on other boards, opinions may get heated over at bethesda but thats just high spirits there is no premeditated plan to flame as far as I'm aware.

Did you spot where he stated he had gone over to NMA with a list of flamebaits he had compiled and was surprised when they banned him for flamebaiting...