Preview This you've gotta see - IGN FO3 preview

[robur]

Let me answer with Alfred Hitchcock's definition of suspense, quoted from memory:

If you see a few people in a room that suddenly blows up because there was a bomb under a table, that's not suspense. Suspense is if you see the bomb ticking while you see the people in the room.

Having Samwise kill Frodo outside of Mount Doom because he wants the ring but was so evil that he wouldn't tell anybody is no clever story telling.

 

[Lumpy]

Uh, yeah, that's the definition of suspense, and it's pretty fucking obvious. But what does suspense have to do with what we were talking about here?
By what you're saying, you'd rather have evil characters plainly advertise themselves rather than pretend to be normal guys.
If there was an evil guy in the fellowship, do you think he'd freak out and leave when they saved a gnome from a well or something?

 

[Lumpy]

The hula dolls actually make sense:

Let's see how it could make sense that it increases your stats. Do you usually perform better when you are happy or when you are sad? I would say a person is more prone towards their peak performance when they are happy. Maybe, the character we play gains enjoyment out of collecting these bobbleheads. Just like in real life people gain enjoyment out of collecting all sorts of weird things.

It doesnt take much roleplaying creativity to come up with a reason.

 

[hakuroshi]

Would a 100 percent evil person join the fellowship of the ring? According to you, yeah, cause the person might kill/screw over everybody to get the ring.

Now, while that might be great role playing, I'd be not too friendly towards the developer if a random NPC would kill all my party members in their sleep after 200 hours of game time and empty their inventories.

The question is if 100 percent evil person would be accepted in the fellowship at all? Of course Gandalf was, and Boromir too, but anyway, if someone was able to infiltrate that deep it cannot be any random evil npc. If you suspect (or even know) it beign evil, and you are good, why take it in the party? Assuming it is not forced to you as in NWN2.

Evil NPC might have a reason to join a party he knows as good. But not any evil. And if developers pursue this course, they should be very careful with consequenses.
On the other hand evil or good NPC might join you at the beginning when you rep is unknown. But it is not very plausible, unless PC literally born yesterday, suffering from amnesia or szhisophrenia, or simply scheming manipulator able to fool his followers.

 

[elander_]

:GASP: Harsh consequences for continuously ignoring there's an evil guy who couldn't care less about killing you all in your sleep and emptying your inventory? Wha'ts the world come too?

Even harsh consequences are supposed to add something to the fun or it's just shitty harsh consequences.

 

[Bradylama]

Having Samwise kill Frodo outside of Mount Doom because he wants the ring but was so evil that he wouldn't tell anybody is no clever story telling.

The purpose of interactive storytelling isn't to build the suspense, though. That's what books and movies are supposed to do, because the reader or viewer is given more information than the protagonist. In games, the player is the protagonist, so the focus shouldn't be on building suspense, it should be instilling a sense of betrayal.

 

[Section8]

The question is if 100 percent evil person would be accepted in the fellowship at all? Of course Gandalf was, and Boromir too, but anyway, if someone was able to infiltrate that deep it cannot be any random evil npc. If you suspect (or even know) it beign evil, and you are good, why take it in the party? Assuming it is not forced to you as in NWN2.

The naive do-gooder approach - I know he's evil, but we can help him mend his ways.-

The pragmatic do-gooder - A man who kills my enemies is not automatically my friend, but so long as he's useful let's allow him to fight for our cause and keep a close eye on him - we know he'll try to betray us.

The streetwise risk-taker - We know he's spying on us, but for his information to be worth something, he'll need to contact someone. Let's keep him around, find out who that person is, and who they work for.

The alignment-challenged pantomime Bioware villain - Muahahahaha, killing you now would be too easy. I'll help you become strong so you're a worthy adversary.

The purpose of interactive storytelling isn't to build the suspense, though. That's what books and movies are supposed to do, because the reader or viewer is given more information than the protagonist. In games, the player is the protagonist, so the focus shouldn't be on building suspense, it should be instilling a sense of betrayal.

Great, great post. Crucial, really. If the audience is aware of a ticking bomb, it generates suspence. If the protagonist is aware of the bomb, he takes action. Of course, that doesn't preclude suspenseful moments for the protagonist. The action of skillfully disarming the bomb as is ticks down is suspenseful.

Having Samwise kill Frodo outside of Mount Doom because he wants the ring but was so evil that he wouldn't tell anybody is no clever story telling.

This statement still remains true, but for an entirely different reason. Killing the protagonist means the end of story telling, clever or otherwise.

 

[robur]

:GASP: Harsh consequences for continuously ignoring there's an evil guy who couldn't care less about killing you all in your sleep and emptying your inventory? Wha'ts the world come too?

Even harsh consequences are supposed to add something to the fun or it's just shitty harsh consequences.

That's my point. Even if it might be "realistic" or "true RPG style" or whatever, a random, unavoidable, unforeseen death and end of the game 200 hours after I invited an evil character into my party that during all those 200 hours didn't show his true face would not really motivate me to play the game once again. How can't I be sure that next time I won't be killed 250 hours after hiring a new guy? Would anybody play that again?

 

[Lumpy]

:GASP: Harsh consequences for continuously ignoring there's an evil guy who couldn't care less about killing you all in your sleep and emptying your inventory? Wha'ts the world come too?

Even harsh consequences are supposed to add something to the fun or it's just shitty harsh consequences.

That's my point. Even if it might be "realistic" or "true RPG style" or whatever, a random, unavoidable, unforeseen death and end of the game 200 hours after I invited an evil character into my party that during all those 200 hours didn't show his true face would not really motivate me to play the game once again. How can't I be sure that next time I won't be killed 250 hours after hiring a new guy? Would anybody play that again?

Did I ask for that? Nope. You can have evil characters with other motives rather than killing you.
Although getting killed by a treacherous party member could be a possible ending for the game. A silly example: you defeat the Dark Lich Lord. As you kneel to get the Sword of Importance from him, the friendly guy who helped you along the way stabs you in the back and grabs the sword, obliterating all your party members with it. Thus 2000 more years of terror and communism begin.
Would that be any less satisfying than getting the sword and making the world a happy place? I don't think so. Not for me, at least.

 

[robur]

A silly example: you defeat the Dark Lich Lord. As you kneel to get the Sword of Importance from him, the friendly guy who helped you along the way stabs you in the back and grabs the sword, obliterating all your party members with it. Thus 2000 more years of terror and communism begin.
Would that be any less satisfying than getting the sword and making the world a happy place? I don't think so. Not for me, at least.

That's not so silly actually. That ending I could accept. Because it had a climatic boss battle (the Dark Lich Lord) and some cool rewards, although just momentarily. Getting a game over while resting and refreshing one's spells, D&D style, would simply suck.

SPOILER ALERT

A bit like the ending in Fable. You kill the big bad guy and then have the choice about what to do with your friendly sister - you kill her to get the greatest sword and the powers of the bad guy or destroy the sword away to let her live.

 

[Vault Dweller]

The first preview that states:

"Despite the attention to detail and enjoyable looking combat, Fallout fans looking for a more traditional sequel may be disappointed. At the same time, Oblivion sold millions of copies, and applying a cool license to a quality formula will prove successful."

http://www.gamedaily.com/fallout-3/xbox ... 239&page=2

No new info though.

 

[Fez]

Oblivion with guns wrapped up in the thin and badly copied skin of Fallout? Who would of thought such a thing could happen?

 

[Hazelnut]

Yeah, I'm incredibly disappointed that no one here predicted this. I mean, you've really let me down on this one!

 

[Fez]

Remember that common rebuttal to various members of the fan base here and elsewhere that you all know nothing? That it was too early to tell? How can you predict this could have happened when you all know nothing and haven't even played the game yet? These were the usual complaints about the negative attitudes and predictions. By some magic beyond mortal reckoning the predictions by the people who spent ages following and watching the series and those involved in it turn out to be right anyway. Again. Gosh!

 

[Bradylama]

Even harsh consequences are supposed to add something to the fun or it's just shitty harsh consequences.

That's my point. Even if it might be "realistic" or "true RPG style" or whatever, a random, unavoidable, unforeseen death and end of the game 200 hours after I invited an evil character into my party that during all those 200 hours didn't show his true face would not really motivate me to play the game once again. How can't I be sure that next time I won't be killed 250 hours after hiring a new guy? Would anybody play that again?

Well it's not going to actually play out like that, much in the same way Tolkien wouldn't have ended Return of the King with "Suddenly Frodo felt Sting slide through his kidney as Samwise lifted the One Ring from his person: The End."

The betrayal has to be something the player can react to. He has to understand that he's been betrayed and given the opportunity to reverse the misfortune. Once the quest item X the focus should be getting item X back from NPC X. You know, a plot twist.

Of course, it's not impossible to build suspense for these sorts of things. It depends on how much information is provided to the player through the player character. Maybe the PC notices something off about NPC X. Is he going to betray the party? He sure is acting odd. This can be written much better than the betrayer characters usually are, where they're so obviously evil that all sense of suspense or betrayal amounts to an "I saw that coming a mile away." Of course, if they can't write it well, then you fall back on the surprise element.

 

[kris]

Is there some way I can only buy the character creation part of the game? Seems like the only redeeming quality I seen in the game and the only improvement upon the old ones. I gonna bully 'em bullies!

Otherwise things sound worse than I expected...

EDIT - Actually I saw hat they did have speech rolls, I expected a mini-game. Nice someting positive.

 

[Claw]

Remember that common rebuttal to various members of the fan base here and elsewhere that you all know nothing? That it was too early to tell?

Why are you using past tense? Allen Rausch is still using it.

By the way, Rausch is German for inebriation. Nomen est omen!

 

[Lumpy]

Of course, it's not impossible to build suspense for these sorts of things. It depends on how much information is provided to the player through the player character. Maybe the PC notices something off about NPC X. Is he going to betray the party? He sure is acting odd. This can be written much better than the betrayer characters usually are, where they're so obviously evil that all sense of suspense or betrayal amounts to an "I saw that coming a mile away." Of course, if they can't write it well, then you fall back on the surprise element.

The episode of Futurama with Bender and his evil brother comes to mind.

 

[Bradylama]

Yeah, Flexo. Thanks to Adult Swim I've watched Futurama more than any other television show.

 

[John Yossarian]

Remember that common rebuttal to various members of the fan base here and elsewhere that you all know nothing? That it was too early to tell? How can you predict this could have happened when you all know nothing and haven't even played the game yet? These were the usual complaints about the negative attitudes and predictions. By some magic beyond mortal reckoning the predictions by the people who spent ages following and watching the series and those involved in it turn out to be right anyway. Again. Gosh!

And make sure you remember the posts that say VD is disregarding or twisting the "good" things Bethesda is saying, when after the game comes out, QT3 and company tell us we were naive in believing the good things Bethesda said.

 

[Hazelnut]

@ Hazelnut:

What did you expect? Did you really think that the media would say "what the fuck are you doing, crackheads?! This isn't Fallout"? Of course they would praise the new Fallout as the best game in the series, saved from "1896" by Bethesda and done right using the best and the latest technology available.

What did I expect? Oh I don't know, maybe an iota of fucking respect for the Fallout franchise?

How unusual. May I ask you why?

Sure, but I'll answer later today/tomorrow if that's okay. I'm all in after a weekend of camping and canoing with my son (we're complete beginners and it was pretty tiring) and I'm bathing my youngest two at the moment.

Okay, it's taken me a while, but here's my why. I expect people to be honest and have integrity, I always have done since I was young. Obviously after 35 years of existence I have quite a large streak of cynicism, but when it comes down to it I still naively expect better than the world seems to deliver on a regular basis. And, quite frankly, I really hope I never lose this naivety altogether.

The recent conversations with robar and deadaris have been interesting. They obviously don't see what we see about what's wrong with the Fallout 3 coverage, and it doesn't appear to (knowingly) come from being dishonest or anything like that, just a different perspective on things. I just find it hard to believe that there seems to be no one in the gaming media who are even trying to look at things from the fallout fanbases' (no, I'm not including the many, many people who only really enjoyed the violence and atmosphere of the Fallout games and didn't see the underlying greatness) perspective, or even just tries to truthfully represent their reaction to the details that have been revealed thus far.

The nearest we've got was the comment (can't remember where its from) that people who liked the originals' gameplay probably won't be liking F3.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I expect people to be honest and have integrity, I always have done since I was young. Obviously after 35 years of existence I have quite a large streak of cynicism, but when it comes down to it I still naively expect better than the world seems to deliver on a regular basis.

That's the part that I failed to understand. I've seen very few honest people with integrity and principles in my 36 years, but I've seen thousands of lying scumbags and horrible assholes fighting each for an opportunity to screw someone and make a buck or earn a free meal or please a higher-up.

The recent conversations with robar and deadaris have been interesting. They obviously don't see what we see about what's wrong with the Fallout 3 coverage...

I assumed that they got used to the ways the industry works and what may shock you is business as usual to them. See the reaction to the fancy clubs, dinners, and hotels stuff - "So what? Everyone does it!"

I just find it hard to believe that there seems to be no one in the gaming media who are even trying to look at things from the fallout fanbases' ...

Well, considering that looking at things from the Fallout fans gets you nothing, while being "understanding and open-minded" gets you a nod from Bethesda and some coverage leftovers to boost your readership and popularity....

 

[Selenti]

That's the part that I failed to understand. I've seen very few honest people with integrity and principles in my 36 years, but I've seen thousands of lying scumbags and horrible assholes fighting each for an opportunity to screw someone and make a buck or earn a free meal or please a higher-up.

I think it's some sort of hard-wired thing. I'm horribly cynical, yet very trusting even after having had that trust violated a lot. It's like a default setting of "okay, this person hasn't done anything wrong, they must be cool!". Obviously not everyone is this way. I can't help but wonder if it's something you develope at an early age. Pretty much everyone in my family (and the people I grew up around) was nice and the sort of person you can trust, maybe that set a pattern of me trusting people more than someone growing up around dickweeds. Who knows?

 

[Vault Dweller]

I was raised in a good family, surrounded by books (as a good geek should), love, and protection. I was never exposed to the ugly side of the world or taught how to deal with it. Then I was released into the wild and it was basically an endless commercial, constantly reminding you what things are like in the real world until you accept it and make certain adjustments.

 

[robur]

I assumed that they got used to the ways the industry works and what may shock you is business as usual to them. See the reaction to the fancy clubs, dinners, and hotels stuff - "So what? Everyone does it!"

Personally, I shrug those things off. Really do. I have to eat when I am away from home. I have to sleep. I enjoy talking to colleagues from all over about what's going on in gaming, share news, rumours, that kind of stuff. If a publisher provides those platforms, all good - but he doesn't get anything from me for that. My opinion is my opinion.

I think the most important thing is to stay unfazed by all that stuff. Which I do. I give many t-shirts and other stuff to friends. I do E3 with a camera and a notebook, no sense in carrying a backpack for schwag. Again, might be an age thing I have developed in my 37th year on this planet.

I was raised in a good family, surrounded by books (as a good geek should), love, and protection. I was never exposed to the ugly side of the world or taught how to deal with it. Then I was released into the wild and it was basically an endless commercial, constantly reminding you what things are like in the real world until you accept it and make certain adjustments.

Same here. I chose to beat the system with its own mechanisms.