RPGWatch Forums
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 Last »

RPGWatch Forums (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/index.php)
-   News Comments (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Fallout 3 - PC Zone UK Article @ NMA (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1562)

Dhruin March 28th, 2007 02:19

Fallout 3 - PC Zone UK Article @ NMA
 
NMA has a transcription of a PC Zone UK interview with Pete Hines on Fallout 3. Here's a snip:
Quote:

We feel that we're doing Fallout 3 having done one and two, even though we didn't. Much like the Elder Scrolls, we look at what worked, we look at what didn't; we look at where we want to take it, how to move it forward and keep it relevant. But we also want to stay true to the stuff people remember and took to heart in Fallout, which was the kinds of quests you did, the choices that were laid before you, the way the game would play differently depending on how you were role-playing and the setting…That sort of stuff."

You also shouldn't expect the lewdness of Fallout 2, as Hines reckons it got "a little too caught up in trying to be funny or controversial or whatever." Which is a shame as certain PCZONE staffers thought, choosing to be a low-paid fluffer at a post-apocaluptic porn studio, only to find the fluid exchange left them with a traditional RPG poisoning, the height of hilarity back in 1998. Whatever the case, the smart bets are for Fallout 3 to be a free-roaming, first-person action/RPG with more dialogue, violence and grit than the Elder Scrolls has ever seen.
More information.

User Name March 28th, 2007 02:19

Gleefully waiting for the shitstorm to arrive…

Corwin March 28th, 2007 02:26

If you visit NMA, you'll see the rabid fan response is already evident!!

Lord Alex March 28th, 2007 03:32

I soooo hate this…. Fallout and Elder Scrolls should never be mentioned in the same sentence together… apples and oranges.

magerette March 28th, 2007 05:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corwin (Post 23843)
If you visit NMA, you'll see the rabid fan response is already evident!!

Yes, there's enough F's on the first page of the thread to start a whole F alphabet. :)

I ask myself why Bethesda has gotten themselves into this.
I answer myself : $$$$

guenthar March 28th, 2007 05:45

THe people there are mostly idiots since there is not one bit of information on this game and all those interview should be ignored since they are just pr bs and don't have any real info in them. Even if Bethesda made this in a first person view they could easily make it as a turn based game or as both types of games.

(Ex. you have a first person view and you can switch it to realtime or turbased for the combat. In turnbased combat time will stop when you encounter an enemy and you have action points at the bottom of the screen and you move/attack/use an item with those points until there gone and it will be the enemies or other allies turns.)

With this you would go the same way as in an action game except you are the only thing doing stuff (so no twitch combat) and you only can do a limited number of things (move a certain distance, shoot a number of times, use a certain number of items) in different combinations. If it was set as both types (which would be easy) you can just turn it on or off in the menu. They could also have a menu specifically for configuring how allies work from determining what each one does in combat in basic or advanced mode to manually controling them in turnbased mode by switching your view to them when it is their turn.

PS. I would have posted it in their forum but their forum sucks and won't let me registered because I have a gmail account only.

The Watchman March 28th, 2007 07:53

So people are idiots for not buying PR bullshit ?!? /shrug. Meaby people wouldnt go ape over it if Pete wasnt as usual BSing around, heck people might even look forward to it if Beth wasnt notorious for dumbing down their games for braindead shitbox users.

Dhruin March 28th, 2007 08:40

It could be turn-based and first-person but it won't be. You don't honestly think it will be turn-based, do you?

lilithn March 28th, 2007 08:50

Ohhh, Fallout was too lewd, you wont have that, that's too much (translate: it would be labelled mature, means 'we' would get less money from the little kiddies worrying parents…) .It won't be funny either, since Fallout was too funny. We don't actually have any sense of humour. But you will have an action oriented RPG!

"with more dialogue, violence and grit than the Elder Scrolls has ever seen"
That won't be too hard to manage……

As for violence, I would like to see them make my favourite animation, when you shot one with too much damage, and the guy's whole side blew up, and slowly fall to the ground…. HAH! Or when caught on fire dancing…:)
That's what I surely won't see. I'm already fuming with anger, why is that? Not healthy.

zakhal March 28th, 2007 09:22

Perhaps they are going more for mad max style. Allthough that definely had its funny parts too.

Ionstormsucks March 28th, 2007 11:27

Well, I can at least understand a bit the many Fallout fans that are out there. Pete Hines is the PR guy at Bethesda, and you know how these people are. It's part of their job to lie to you. I think Bethesda could avoid a lot of the every-interview-discussion if they avoided mentioning Elder Scrolls on a constant basis when talking about Fallout. Meanwhile they should have understood that the average Fallout fan doesn't give all too much about Oblivion & Co. The problem about raging fans is self-made. You cannot say Fallout 3 will be a true Fallout one the one hand, and then come up with some Elder Scrolls comparison… that will scare Fallout fans away.

Gorath March 28th, 2007 12:22

This leads to the question "What´s Bethesda´s goal for Fallout 3?" Are they trying to win Fallout fans or do they simply want to draw 50% of the Oblivion crowd over to Fallout 3, and then grow the franchise from there?

JemyM March 28th, 2007 12:24

What I miss from the article is the companions. The guys you got with you in Fallout really improved the game. In Elder Scrolls you run around on your own, you have no friends at all. I do not see a FPS being able to support companions like the original game did. :(

Maylander March 28th, 2007 12:29

Let's keep one thing in mind here - making a game today costs a whole lot more than it did 10 years ago, and therefore they need to sell a lot better as well. A turn-based RPG would please the hardcore fans, yes, but it would not sell enough to be profitable. There simply isn't a big enough market for such games today - not even the original crew making Fallout 1-2 would be willing to make a game like that today.

Let's be real here, developers are funded by investors, and investors want to make money. Since game development costs so much these days, you need to sell a lot more copies than all the hardcore RPG fans in the world could buy. You need to get casual gamers to buy your game, or you'll lose money -> your job -> no more games.

Will Fallout be directed at the masses? Yes, will it please the most hardcore fans? No, of course not, neither would BG3 or PS:T2, the market has changed too much to make similar games now. Will it be a good game? Maybe, maybe not. If they really implement the free-roaming, lots of dialogues/conseqences style of Fallout it might be great even without being turn-based. Hopefully they'll focus more on 3rd person than 1st person, like in Gothic, since that would fit better in my opinion.

Corwin March 28th, 2007 12:42

Maylander, you have answered Gorath's question. Beth want to MAKE MONEY!! That's it. DO they care about the fans? Perhaps a little, but the bottom line is always KING!! Will they make a good game? I hope so. WIll it really be what I/we want from F3? I honestly doubt it. Will I buy it? Probably, even if only so I can review it for the site and rip it to shreds!! :biggrin:

BillSeurer March 28th, 2007 14:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corwin (Post 23912)
WIll it really be what I/we want from F3? I honestly doubt it.

Thank you for deciding what "we" want. What are "we" going to have for lunch today? I would hate to accidently get something that "we" don't like. And how about supper?

dagoo7 March 28th, 2007 15:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillSeurer (Post 23931)
Thank you for deciding what "we" want. What are "we" going to have for lunch today? I would hate to accidently get something that "we" don't like. And how about supper?

Come now, you're sarcasm is a bit overwrought and unjustified here. Corwin was merely using the qualified "we" reference to refer to those of us (and that's likely pretty much all of us reading this thread) that played the hell outta Fallout 1 and 2 and have been eagerly awaiting an updated version of that game for years. And all previous posters expressed, at least indirectly, a desire for a version of the game that was true to the classic presentation and mechanics.

I enjoy a good sarcastic gibe as much as anyone, but save the ire for when its justified.

Ionstormsucks March 28th, 2007 16:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maylander (Post 23907)
Let's keep one thing in mind here - making a game today costs a whole lot more than it did 10 years ago, and therefore they need to sell a lot better as well. A turn-based RPG would please the hardcore fans, yes, but it would not sell enough to be profitable. There simply isn't a big enough market for such games today - not even the original crew making Fallout 1-2 would be willing to make a game like that today.

Let's be real here, developers are funded by investors, and investors want to make money. Since game development costs so much these days, you need to sell a lot more copies than all the hardcore RPG fans in the world could buy. You need to get casual gamers to buy your game, or you'll lose money -> your job -> no more games.

Will Fallout be directed at the masses? Yes, will it please the most hardcore fans? No, of course not, neither would BG3 or PS:T2, the market has changed too much to make similar games now. Will it be a good game? Maybe, maybe not. If they really implement the free-roaming, lots of dialogues/conseqences style of Fallout it might be great even without being turn-based. Hopefully they'll focus more on 3rd person than 1st person, like in Gothic, since that would fit better in my opinion.

I pretty much disagree with nearly everything you wrote down there…

Brother None March 28th, 2007 18:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maylander (Post 23907)
A turn-based RPG would please the hardcore fans, yes, but it would not sell enough to be profitable. There simply isn't a big enough market for such games today

Prove it.

Quote:

This leads to the question "What´s Bethesda´s goal for Fallout 3?" Are they trying to win Fallout fans or do they simply want to draw 50% of the Oblivion crowd over to Fallout 3, and then grow the franchise from there?
Whatever is the answer, it's easy enough to argue that trying to balance between the two is unwise. There are plenty of people out there who would love to hear "It's going to be Oblivion with guns", but the flipside of it is that they would dislike it being "true" to the originals, and the strict sense of the word.

I don't think they're pleasing anyone now, trying to please both sides.

Meh. They should just starting releasing information already,

Quote:

If you visit NMA, you'll see the rabid fan response is already evident!!
Thank the Lord we're so much better than those guys, what?

Lucky Day March 28th, 2007 22:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maylander (Post 23907)
Let's keep one thing in mind here - making a game today costs a whole lot more than it did 10 years ago, and therefore they need to sell a lot better as well. A turn-based RPG would please the hardcore fans, yes, but it would not sell enough to be profitable. There simply isn't a big enough market for such games today - not even the original crew making Fallout 1-2 would be willing to make a game like that today.

Let's be real here, developers are funded by investors, and investors want to make money. Since game development costs so much these days, you need to sell a lot more copies than all the hardcore RPG fans in the world could buy. You need to get casual gamers to buy your game, or you'll lose money -> your job -> no more games.

Will Fallout be directed at the masses? Yes, will it please the most hardcore fans? No, of course not, neither would BG3 or PS:T2, the market has changed too much to make similar games now. Will it be a good game? Maybe, maybe not. If they really implement the free-roaming, lots of dialogues/conseqences style of Fallout it might be great even without being turn-based. Hopefully they'll focus more on 3rd person than 1st person, like in Gothic, since that would fit better in my opinion.

you hit the nail on the head here.

Quote:

You also shouldn't expect the lewdness of Fallout 2, as Hines reckons it got "a little too caught up in trying to be funny or controversial or whatever."
excellent! Fallout 1 and 2 had a swear filter and a violence which worked most of the time but there was no way you could turn this type of garbage off. I recall Beth saying the game would be released as Mature in the past but I hope this statement indicates a move in the right in the direction.

Knowing what didn't work with Morrowind and coming up with Oblivion was fine except there were many problems with Oblivion out of the box even with those Morrowind fixes. In particular the scaled encounters.

This is the biggest concern I have with Beth, not that it is isometric or turn based. Was Wizardry 8 any less of a great game than Wizardry I? Let's hope for some equivalent perspective.

As was stated before the comparisons to Oblivion are mostly for investors and people who look at sales numbers. Its also probably there to make sure expectations are clear for buyers and they aren't (as) screaming mad when the game is released.

If it does well then old Fallout fans are going to have to put up with a lot of new fans just as the Ultima fans had to put up with the new Ultima Online players who didn't even know there were 8 games before it.


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 03:42.
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 Last »

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch