RPGWatch Forums
Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 Last »

RPGWatch Forums (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/index.php)
-   News Comments (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Diablo 3 - Why Fallout 1 Could be succesfull Today @ Pixelitis (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17475)

aries100 June 27th, 2012 19:44

Diablo 3 - Why Fallout 1 Could be succesfull Today @ Pixelitis
 
In an editorial on their website, Pixelitis argues that the success of Diablo III means that an old school isometric game like Fallout 1 could still be succesful today. Link to the editorial:
http://www.pixelitis.net/features/
staff-musings-diablo-iii-proves-old-school-fallout-can-do-well

A quote from the beginning of the editorial:
Quote:

On the week of Diablo III’s release last month, I was one of the millions of gamers click, click, and clicking away through the first act of the game, bashing down many a skeleton and undead foe. As the hours passed and I spent more time in the game’s environments, glancing occasionally at the classic HUD at the bottom and an info box at the bottom-left corner, it hit me: “Wow, Fallout 3 could have been like this and it would have been awesome.” And then I felt bummed out, knowing that wasn’t the case.
More information.

joxer June 27th, 2012 19:44

Fallout could be like that?
Is he normal?
Thank god Fallout is not just mobrespawns killing clickfest.

Carnifex June 27th, 2012 19:55

LOL@ this person putting D3 anywhere near the allmighty Fallout. That's like comparing a Ford to a Jag….and ya, the Ford ain't Fallout. The other one is.

He ain't normal.


-Carn

fadedc June 27th, 2012 20:01

I can tell that some people haven't actually read the article that they are commenting on.

It's about the isometric graphic style of D3, which they say most modern games are afraid to use, including Fallout 3. It has nothing remotely to do with the gameplay.

DArtagnan June 27th, 2012 20:04

So, because one game with isometric graphics is a success - any game using this perspective can be a success?

joxer June 27th, 2012 20:07

Not just any, but Fallout game.

DArtagnan June 27th, 2012 20:09

Yeah, but Fallout has fantastic gameplay - so what's the surprise?

fadedc June 27th, 2012 20:11

Well there argument is just that Fallout 3 was to scared to use the isometric graphics of the previous Fallout games, because they thought that was the kiss of death. They claim that D3's success shows that a game with isometric graphics can be succesful.

Anyway, I don't have any opinions about the argument, I'm just clarifying what it is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DArtagnan (Post 1061150676)
So, because one game with isometric graphics is a success - any game using this perspective can be a success?


Cacheperl June 27th, 2012 20:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by DArtagnan (Post 1061150676)
So, because one game with isometric graphics is a success - any game using this perspective can be a success?

Yes. Of course. Can be.

And its important to remember this. Developers should focus less on building astonishing graphics, but rather try to deliver good gameplay and story. Look at all those ego/ots RPGs (Gothic3, Arcania, Risen 1/2, etc.). Nice and shiny, but dont go beyond the outer looks…

All those examples show: graphic is not the major quality factor that most people in the industry still seem to think it is.


(Yeah, I know. Diablo 3 is a success, but not really a "good RPG". But they have gameplay right, I'm very sure of that. They just suck at balancing D3 and milk the RMAH too much.)

DArtagnan June 27th, 2012 20:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by fadedc (Post 1061150680)
Well there argument is just that Fallout 3 was to scared to use the isometric graphics of the previous Fallout games, because they thought that was the kiss of death. They claim that D3's success shows that a game with isometric graphics can be succesful.

Anyway, I don't have any opinions about the argument, I'm just clarifying what it is.

Fallout 3 used the next Gamebryo iteration for obvious reasons.

I don't think Bethesda were "scared" of the isometric perspective - I just think they saw an obvious opportunity to bring a beloved franchise into modern day.

As for an isometric success - I think that's quite doable, but I'm far from convinced it would be MORE of a success than a FP approach.

DArtagnan June 27th, 2012 20:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cacheperl (Post 1061150681)
Yes. Of course. Can be.

And its important to remember this. Developers should focus less on building astonishing graphics, but rather try to deliver good gameplay and story. Look at all those ego/ots RPGs (Gothic3, Arcania, Risen 1/2, etc.). Nice and shiny, but dont go beyond the outer looks…

All those examples show: graphic is not the major quality factor that most people in the industry still seem to think it is.


(Yeah, I know. Diablo 3 is a success, but not really a "good RPG". But they have gameplay right, I'm very sure of that. They just suck at balancing D3 and milk the RMAH too much.)

Well, I'd be the first to promote gameplay over graphics - but I can't deny that the majority of the audience exposure is about visually dazzling them.

It's the way of things.

vurt June 27th, 2012 20:24

FO3 wasnt created to please the retards over at NMA, or Diablo fans, its also very doubtful Diablo3 fans are the same people that enjoyed FO1-2, they are very different games. FO3 was made with Bethesda fans in mind, which i find pretty natural. Also, FO3 was a huge success..

fadedc June 27th, 2012 20:29

Well a lot of the original fallout fans would have been happier if FO3 had stuck with the isometric gameplay used by the previous 2 games. But of course, it might not have been as big of an overall hit if they had done that.

ChienAboyeur June 27th, 2012 20:30

What's the article about? I have not played Diablo 3 so it is not clear.

Is it about perspective, a point of view or 2D isometric projection graphics vs 3D graphics?

It sounds weird that Diablo 3 is not 3D graphics.

It obviously adopts a certain perspective but so other 3 D graphics games do without being based on 2D isometric projection graphics.

JDR13 June 27th, 2012 20:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cacheperl (Post 1061150681)
Look at all those ego/ots RPGs (Gothic3, Arcania, Risen 1/2, etc.). Nice and shiny, but dont go beyond the outer looks…

Something tells me that you haven't actually played those games. Well… maybe Arcania. :)

Nameless one June 27th, 2012 20:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cacheperl (Post 1061150681)
And its important to remember this. Developers should focus less on building astonishing graphics, but rather try to deliver good gameplay and story. Look at all those ego/ots RPGs (Gothic3, Arcania, Risen 1/2, etc.). Nice and shiny, but dont go beyond the outer looks…

Gothic 3 and Risen don't go beyond they outer looks?That statement is just untrue.Both game have detailed, complex and realistic worlds filled with interesting characters and multiple choices and their consequences.

zahratustra June 27th, 2012 21:52

Are you guys seriously trying to have a debate over "staff musings"?

JuliusMagnus June 27th, 2012 22:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by fadedc (Post 1061150680)
Well there argument is just that Fallout 3 was to scared to use the isometric graphics of the previous Fallout games, because they thought that was the kiss of death. They claim that D3's success shows that a game with isometric graphics can be succesful.

Anyway, I don't have any opinions about the argument, I'm just clarifying what it is.

But it wasn't the reason Fallout 3 wasn't isometric. The reason they didn't do isometric is because they had never developed such a game. They chose to stick to what they knew, at least on an engine/work flow level.

Making an isometric Fallout 3 would have meant they had to basically start from scratch in developing editing tools and that wasn't gonna happen.

The whole 'isometric is kiss of death' was more a reason the community fabricated. But it was simply a matter of sticking to what you know best.

No doubt some marketing folk had that opinion (especially at large publishers), but Bethesda Game Studios has never been a studio that developes based on demands by marketing.

Fallout 3 was made that way because of the competences Bethesda Game Studios thought they were good at (which had never been isometric).

fadedc June 27th, 2012 22:48

Probably true. Also, if they had used a real time isometric system, it might have annoyed fans of the originals just as much as their real time FPS system did.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JuliusMagnus (Post 1061150702)
But it wasn't the reason Fallout 3 wasn't isometric. The reason they didn't do isometric is because they had never developed such a game. They chose to stick to what they knew, at least on an engine/work flow level.

Making an isometric Fallout 3 would have meant they had to basically start from scratch in developing editing tools and that wasn't gonna happen.

The whole 'isometric is kiss of death' was more a reason the community fabricated. But it was simply a matter of sticking to what you know best.

No doubt some marketing folk had that opinion (especially at large publishers), but Bethesda Game Studios has never been a studio that developes based on demands by marketing.

Fallout 3 was made that way because of the competences Bethesda Game Studios thought they were good at (which had never been isometric).


Drithius June 27th, 2012 22:49

I feel dirty just trying to figure out the author's link between these two games.


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 14:50.
Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 Last »

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