-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Quote:
Originally Posted by econ21
But did that change between Morrowind and Oblivion? I thought that series had always been a bit "action" oriented, so that the player's manual dexterity mattered unlike the Kotor/NWN type game where it was just the character's stats. I think the particular dislike expressed for Oblivion comes from disaffected Morrowind fans who have a number of grievances, notably the scaling of monsters and loot to your level. (I disagree with them on that, but then I was never a Morrowind fan).
Disclaimer: I came to the TES series with Morrowind, after it had been through a few patches.
Personally, I saw a pretty significant shift in gameplay from Morrowind to Oblivion. Stats/traits/whatever meant far less in Oblivion than Morrowind, and the game felt much, much more shallow, repetitive, and meaningless. There were a number of things that killed Oblivion for me, almost too numerous to mention. Some of them are the monster/loot scaling which I abhor, lack of immersion/story/branching dialogues, lack of mutually exclusive quests/missions, the complete voice acting that was terribly implemented and extremely game limiting, "Radiant AI" which was decidedly obnoxious and unimpressive, extremely repetitive scenery and landscapes, utterly nerfed magicka, silly influence games, horribly broken stock interface (thank god for mods), etc etc etc...
Honestly I went through a phase where I liked it from the start, slowly got displeased with it, then went to hating it, now I can accept and play it again. Why? Because I realized it's not an RPG, or even a so-called "action RPG". It's a FPS with swords and magic. Bethesda in their arrogance repeatedly tried to market it as a real modern cRPG, "pushing the boundaries of role-playing", soil erosion etc, and all that nonsense and hype. They utterly failed at making a real cRPG, but they did make a fun FPS if you look at it that way. For those who say it is an RPG, I can make any dumb shooter and slap a few stats on it, a bad story and call it an RPG, but at the end of the day it's not. The term "RPG" is one of those that's been sorely abused and misused over the past few years by the gaming industry.
Quote:
I am definitely an RPG fan and am pretty useless at FPS games, but I thought Oblivion pulled off the combat really well. To me, it does look and feel 'real'. It is less hectic and feels more authentic than the comparable combat in Morrowind and, dare I say it, Mount and Blade. (Mount & Blade does some things very well - the archery and the riding - but suffers when you melee more than one enemy at a time and their frenzied attacks mean you are almost inevitably overpowered, being constantly knocked back.)
I partially agree with this and disagree. Agree in that I did honestly like the combat system for the most part from Morrowind. There is SOME element to play skill and "twitch" gaming. The problem I have with it is that it really does remove the whole RPG aspect from the equation, and stats literally mean almost nothing. A low level player with horribly crappy equipment and extremely low skills/attribs can waste a pretty high level NPC with great gear and much higher stats, just because they are good at twitch style gaming. I went through the whole Arena at level 3 hardly breaking a sweat against the NPCs who were level scaled higher than me (ugh) with much better weapons. In Morrowind stats meant much much more, and you could get into deep poop real quick if you tackled something too hard off the bat. In Oblivion I never once had to worry about it, because I am pretty durn good at twitch style gaming, and because of how the system works I could kill stuff at will, and escape easily if I got in over my head. Morrowind I couldn't do that at all until much higher clvls, but then again one should be a god at later points in the game.
Cheers
:balloon2:
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Note - these are my personal opinions only.
Hmmm... I shall remain heavily skeptical about FO3 for the time being, given the new developer and the Fallout universe. I am not one of those "NMA freaks", but I do wholeheartedly agree with a number of their boilerplate statements. Fallout 1 and 2 are/were two of the best cRPGs we've ever had. Tactics was ok, I enjoyed it. I never played BoS but from what I've read and seen, I doubt I'd like it.
- cRPG. Fallout represents the very best of turn based computer RPGs. I do NOT want real time combat, it MUST be turn-based.
- SPECIAL. Morrowind/Oblivion style stats and skill increasing will absolutely not do here whatsoever.
- I do NOT want "Oblivion with guns". I do not want first person perspective at all. Don't really want behind locked 3rd person camera at all either. Isometric isn't required, in fact I could do away with this, as long as it's some kind of top down/non fixed camera. This ties in with turn-based.
- Branching dialogues/mutually exclusive decisions,quests/consequences. Sure there were kids in FO1/2, and you could certainly kill them if you wanted to be a sadistic bastard, BUT you had to accept the consequences. Your decisions and actions meant and had noticable effects in the game "universe", and you had to think careful about what you did. Also, there was not always a clear cut "good/neutral/evil" take on everything. Sometimes you had to do "evil" things to achieve a "good" end to tasks. Sometimes taking a neutral stance would end up having very negative ramifications down the road. For example, if you optimized the power plant at Gecko, Vault City would come in and take over, killing most of the ghouls. Something seeminly good or innocent had very bad results at the end.
Given Beth's comments in the distant and recent past, I'm rather worried. Beth has not had a very good history at all of listening to it's fans, as the Morrowind/Oblivion shift clearly shows. The fact that this is also being co-developed for the console worries me, as games like this do tend to get "dumbed down". I don't mean that last statement as a troll, but it is in some ways reality, if you look at cascading effects. Consoles as a rule must have a much simpler interface for the gamepads, this in turn will often eliminate many possiblities that can only be accomplished using a keyboard/mouse. Also, devs sometimes do a horribly crappy job with the interfaces between the platforms. Look at Oblivion out of the box (which the devs admitted was horrible on the PC) and Deus Ex 2.
As someone pointed out in a really good blog post, Fallout is one of those things that has become "larger than itself". The old guard and old fan-base are inextricably linked to the franchise, and they're angry at what's been done with it so far. Beth has a real pickle on their hands, because they could ignore that sizeable old guard, but they run the risk of tanking sales because of that, that even their hardcore fanboys won't be able to save them from. The fact that they "ignored" their fanbase that had survived the switch from Daggerfall to Morrowind when they released Oblivion also does not bode well in my view. Someone made a comment that I think has some honest truth in it, which is that Beth aimed (and succeeded) in making a "deep" FPS. I can't really elaborate on this without sounding a bit condescending so I'll stop, I hope people understood the intent of what I am repeating here.
Hopefully we will see some real information and news soon. Beth's silence so far hasn't done much to alay the fears, if anything it's probably added more fuel to the fire if the Beth FO3 forums are any indication.
Cheers all
:balloon2:
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
I have to agree with Whacker's sentiments towards the handlign of Oblvion. Again, I too entered TES with Morrowind, which I cherish to this day.
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
I hope for the best, but realistically, Fallout3 has such huge expectations that it will be nearly impossible to meet them. Still, I hope....
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xiahou
I hope for the best, but realistically, Fallout3 has such huge expectations that it will be nearly impossible to meet them. Still, I hope....
OK, bear with me here a second.
*puts on tinfoil hat*
I definitely, absolutely think it's possible to make a worthy sequel to this game, giving it a "modern" spin AND staying true to what Fallout represents.
That said...
I wonder if Bethseda got into this "with a bone to pick", so to speak. Let's examine some ideas here, keep in mind that much of this is my conjecture backed up with a few facts.
First, look at what Bethesda has done over the years with their TES games. One could argue, very successfully IMO, that they're moving distinctly away from being RPGs to action games.
Second, I propose that with the 3 most recent iterations of the TES games, Beth has lost a very decent sized chunk of their original fanbase. I've done enough reading to realize that there was a decent backlash in the move from Daggerfall to Morrowind. In doing this move, they arguably alienated a number of their older fans, some of whom we can assume stopped buying games at that point. If we look at the transition from Morrowind to Oblivion, it's much more obvious due to the fact that this is a relatively recent event, that there was an even greater backlash from the then-existing fanbase. One only needs to browse the forums now and dig up old threads to see that there is a very sizeable group of disenchanted people.
Third, following in the above, Oblivion sold very well, all things considered. As of Jan 2007, apparently 3 million total sales including the console. Morrowind has sold apparently 4 million units (both console and PC) as of right now, BUT we have to take into account that MW is also almost 5 years old, and Oblivion isn't even 1 year old yet. Oblivion also sold 1.7 million units by April of '06, which is insane. Clearly Oblivion is pacing itself to outsell Morrowind by a good margin.
Fourth, one could further argue that Oblivion's runaway sales is due to them tailoring the game to a much wider audience than their original existing Daggerfall/Morrowind base. I have absolutely no data to back this up, I don't know what Morrowind's sales looked like around launch, nor could I find how well Daggerfall sold.
Here's my idea. If you can accept the above as reasonable, I propose that Bethesda picked up the Fallout franchise and plan to do the exact same thing with it that they did with Oblivion, and when it sells like hotcakes, that will "prove" to themselves and the world that one doesn't need existing fans (hence, they can ignore the old guard) and still be very commercially viable. This, coupled with I am willing to bet they are still kind of annoyed at a lot of the bad press and complaints (much from their existing fanbase) they've been getting since launch. So in short, this will be a major "in your face!" if they succeed.
So this is a giant stretch, and arguably not a business decision, but I can see something of one in there. It's more of a "proof of concept" that if you market to the larger audience, those sales will more than make up for losing existing customers. Hence why I think they knowingly bought this franchise, NMA and all, as there's some real possible value in demonstrating a development tactic with an old/existing franchise, one with an ANGRY fanbase at that.
OK this is a giant stretch, probably untrue (mostly). You can take off your tinfoil hats now. :grin:
:balloon2:
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whacker
- SPECIAL. Morrowind/Oblivion style stats and skill increasing will absolutely not do here whatsoever.
- I do NOT want "Oblivion with guns". I do not want first person perspective at all. Don't really want behind locked 3rd person camera at all either. Isometric isn't required, in fact I could do away with this, as long as it's some kind of top down/non fixed camera. This ties in with turn-based.
Two stupid questions:
What was special about S.P.E.C.I.A.L.? I never played the game, so I'm curious.
And, about the cameras, would you accept something like, say, NWN2's camera?
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntiochusIII
What was special about S.P.E.C.I.A.L.? I never played the game, so I'm curious.
SPECIAL had four elements:
- attributes (fixed at start, you allocated points across 7 stats - strength, intelligence, charisma, toughness, agility, perception, luck)
- traits (pick two at start - they have upsides and downsides)
- skills (put points in as you level, with more points if intelligent - eg. small guns, speech, lockpicking etc)
- perks (get one every 3 levels - e.g. night vision, sniper, rapid rate of fire etc)
One nice thing about the system was that it provided a lot of variety and potential for customisation.
Another nice thing was its balance - for example, of each of the six attributes, the manual says "of course, this is the most important" and it's almost true: all the stats matter (unlike DnD where a class cares about only 3 stats).
Together the variety and balance meant character design and levelling up involved interesting and rewarding choices. The fact that you could solve some quests with a variety of different skills (and not just whacking everything) added to this.
The perks were also very juicy - I guess they correspond to "feats" in DnD.
To be honest, I think the Morrowind/Oblivion system also has many of the above virtues and in many ways reminds me of SPECIAL. Both SPECIAL and the TES system beat D20/DnD for a sole protagonist (as opposed to party-based) game. The one thing I dislike about the Morrowind/Oblivion system is the way it encourages artificial play styles (switching weapons/armour, letting yourself getting whacked by mudcrabs etc) to get the 5x attribute bonus on level up.
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
What is this SPECIAL you're talking about?
Entering "SPECIAL", even with other words like game or RPG doesn't seem to give me any results, it sounds like a mix of JA2, Lionheart and Silent Storm so I'm curious.
And btw, I never played any Fallout and never bought or played Oblivion, mainly because of the level scaling.
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
[QUOTE=Husar]What is this SPECIAL you're talking about?
It's just the system for character creation and levelling in the Fallout games. I am not sure I can explain it any more than I have done in my previous post. You can read some of the guides on gamefaqs if you want to know more. Better still, follow froggy and buy the Fallout games - SPECIAL is one of one of their standout features.
Quote:
, it sounds like a mix of JA2, Lionheart and Silent Storm so I'm curious.
I have a vague memory that Lionheart used a variant of the SPECIAL system, but I never played the game.
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Hmm ... I still have Fallout 1+2 around somewhere - both where part of a game compilation I bought a couple of years ago - but I somehow never found the time to go beyond installing them and having a quick look.
Perhaps I should finally take the time and actually go a bit deeper :thinking:
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whacker
So this is a giant stretch, and arguably not a business decision, but I can see something of one in there. It's more of a "proof of concept" that if you market to the larger audience, those sales will more than make up for losing existing customers. Hence why I think they knowingly bought this franchise, NMA and all, as there's some real possible value in demonstrating a development tactic with an old/existing franchise, one with an ANGRY fanbase at that.
I think you're right and wrong. Bethesda doesn't pay any attention at all to what goes on at NMA, RPG Codex, and similar places. Nothing constructive ever comes out of those sites, so there's little point in trying to address their complaints. Furthermore, they know there's no way they can please those people, so they're not trying. I don't think Bethesda is trying to prove anything to anyone. When it comes down to it, no matter how many complaints there may be about Oblivion, they're a really successful game developer at the moment. They don't need to prove anything, because they already have.
That said, I definitely agree that they're just doing their own thing with the Fallout franchise. They bought it, so it's their IP now and they can do whatever they want. They're definitely putting a lot of effort into creating a world that has the same style as the original games, but I don't think they're trying to recreate those games in actual play style. I personally have no problems with this and I'm interested to see what they come up with. The NMA people will probably say that there's no way to do a Fallout game without an isometric view and turn-based combat. I think that type of thinking is narrow minded, at best, and disastrous for the entire game industry, at worst. Games need to move and develop. People rarely want the same thing over, and over, and over, and over again. I have faith that Bethesda will move Fallout in a new and interesting direction. I could well be wrong, but I think those people that condemn them because they're not making a clone of the first two games are a bit selfish.
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ser Clegane
Hmm ... I still have Fallout 1+2 around somewhere - both where part of a game compilation I bought a couple of years ago - but I somehow never found the time to go beyond installing them and having a quick look.
Perhaps I should finally take the time and actually go a bit deeper :thinking:
Will be the most beneficial activity you'll be doing after breathing. :2thumbsup:
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ser Clegane
Perhaps I should finally take the time and actually go a bit deeper.
Like a lot of classic RPGs, they are rather slow burners. FO2, for example, is possibly my favorite CRPG of all time, but I have to repetitively slaughter a lot of rats, scorpions and geckos before it really takes off. However, I find the atmosphere and world very immersive, and it does become very rewarding due to the epic scale - when the ending comes, and you see how your actions changed the fate of the places you have visited, it is strangely moving.
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
I would like to bring up another point and say that since the same people who made Oblivion will be working on FO3 there is a good chance it may be as moddable as Morrowind and Oblivion. There are some seriously cool and powerful mods for MW and OB, some of which dramatically improve gameplay. So even if FO3 is released and isn't quite as great as people expect I have faith modders will set things right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by econ21
But did that change between Morrowind and Oblivion? I thought that series had always been a bit "action" oriented, so that the player's manual dexterity mattered unlike the Kotor/NWN type game where it was just the character's stats. I think the particular dislike expressed for Oblivion comes from disaffected Morrowind fans who have a number of grievances, notably the scaling of monsters and loot to your level. (I disagree with them on that, but then I was never a Morrowind fan).
I am definitely an RPG fan and am pretty useless at FPS games, but I thought Oblivion pulled off the combat really well. To me, it does look and feel 'real'. It is less hectic and feels more authentic than the comparable combat in Morrowind and, dare I say it, Mount and Blade. (Mount & Blade does some things very well - the archery and the riding - but suffers when you melee more than one enemy at a time and their frenzied attacks mean you are almost inevitably overpowered, being constantly knocked back.)
Good points but per my previous paragraph, monster level scaling issues were quickly and easily resolved in MW and OB thanks to the incredibly powerful editors that shipped with the games and the efforts of countless ambitious modders. Of course modding means little to console gamers but screw 'em!
I love RPG and FPS games equally but am always wary when developers attempt to combine the two. Often the result is gameplay that is skewed heavily in favor of FPS skills, tactics and AI/gameplay exploits with stats and attributes having minimal effect on the outcome.
Realistic melee combat is very hard to model correctly in any game, let alone one that factors in stats and skills into the equation. Severance: Blade of Darkness and Rune are some of the most realistic FPS melee oriented games ever made but they were devoid of any RPG element. Even Mount and Blade fails to deliver the RPG element effectively. Melee combat is hard enough but when incorporated into a RPG it can be a bit much. If FO3 has as much depth as its predecessors then I'd much rather have combat resolved using round based combat like in KOTOR.
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
What is this SPECIAL you're talking about?
Econ gave a great summary in his post. Here's a link to the wiki article on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPECIAL_System
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ser Clegane
Perhaps I should finally take the time and actually go a bit deeper
The only thing I'll offer is that you should be in the proper frame of mind when you do so. These games are OLD, FO1 was considered graphically dated when it was first released in '97. It's not very pretty, but if you stick with it and keep a OPEN positive mindset, you'll start to get into the depth of story, the gritty and often hilarious settings, campy humor, outstanding turn based gameplay. Definitely RTFM to start with, and go through the walkthrough at the start to learn how the game works, I made that mistake and thrashed around for about half an hour trying to figure out the interface. If you stick with it though, you'll be rewarded with one of the best cRPG experiences you can ever have. Also, start with Fallout 1 before you do 2, not only because of story, but so you can see how the game itself progresses and eventually appreciate some of the improvements made with Fallout 2. Don't forget killap's fan-made patch for FO2 when you do get to it, it makes it playable, stock patched v1.02d (which was the last patch) was unplayable in my opinion due to scripting bugs.
Quote:
Nothing constructive ever comes out of those sites, so there's little point in trying to address their complaints. Furthermore, they know there's no way they can please those people, so they're not trying.
Both of these statements are patently false. NMA is often poorly represented by a few very loud, rude, vocal individuals with severe bones to pick, if you read their forums you'll find that there are a good deal of well spoken, polite, yet dedicated individuals. Codex is similar but also very different as it's not dedicated or focused on anything in particular. It's entirely possible to "please" the old Fallout crowd in my view, it's just going to take some real work to do so and certain tenants must be adhered to.
Quote:
I don't think Bethesda is trying to prove anything to anyone. When it comes down to it, no matter how many complaints there may be about Oblivion, they're a really successful game developer at the moment. They don't need to prove anything, because they already have.
Perhaps this is my fault for not elaborating enough. They certainly are successful if you use the definition of sales as the measuring stick. The issue is, is that their current product is not an RPG, which is mainly how they portrayed and marketed it as. If Beth wants to continue down the road they are with their games, that's certainly their perogative and they'll probably be highly successful, the issue that the RPG crowd has is that they aren't going to be making RPGs anymore and as such should stop trying to push them as such. I subscribe completely to this view.
Quote:
but I don't think they're trying to recreate those games in actual play style. I personally have no problems with this and I'm interested to see what they come up with.
I both agree and disagre here. I agree in that I'd like to see a "fresh" look at the whole Fallout gameplay style. For example, doing away with the old hexes for positioning would open up a bunch of new possibilities as I see it. The problem is that certain tenants of what the series is about, stuff like what I said in earlier posts, must be adhered to in order to stay with the intent of what the series is. Of course it's possible to make a FPS or an RTS set in the Fallout universe, it would *not* be Fallout.
Quote:
The NMA people will probably say that there's no way to do a Fallout game without an isometric view and turn-based combat.
Many of them do say isometric view is, but I could do without it. Any type of overhead cam, esp. an adjusable one, would be outstanding in my view. Turn-based combat is indeed absolutely integral.
Quote:
I think that type of thinking is narrow minded, at best, and disastrous for the entire game industry, at worst. Games need to move and develop.
Sorry, but this is crap. "Real-time" does not equal better. "Twitch-based" does not equal better. "Developing" does not mean switching away from a proven, tried and true workable turn-based system that represents the core of whatever it is that's being worked on. There's something to be said for "If it ain't broke, don't fix it", and not making changes just for the sake of making changes, which given Beth's statements and arrogance is exactly what I fear they will do. This really annoys me when people equate "real-time" with new hotness and "turn-based" with old and busted.
Quote:
People rarely want the same thing over, and over, and over, and over again.
So taking what I think the intent of your statement is here here, what exactly do you think you've been playing over the past umpteen years? Please don't tell me that "the TW games aren't the same thing over and over and over" because they are. Quake? Doom? Heh. Counter-strike 1 and Source? If anything those games prove that people DO play the same stuff over and over again and they lap it up like nectar.
Quote:
I have faith that Bethesda will move Fallout in a new and interesting direction.
Sadly I agree that they'll take it in whatever direction they want. I think we both differ on what the definition of "interesting" is in this case.
Quote:
I could well be wrong, but I think those people that condemn them because they're not making a clone of the first two games are a bit selfish.
I wouldn't call it selfish, but I agree it's uncalled for, nor do I think that the old guard is demanding a "clone". The thing that they want is to keep the few core tenants of what Fallout is and represents untarnished. That is, we want a real cRPG that plays like one, not an action oriented FPS.
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whacker
Perhaps this is my fault for not elaborating enough. They certainly are successful if you use the definition of sales as the measuring stick. The issue is, is that their current product is not an RPG, which is mainly how they portrayed and marketed it as. If Beth wants to continue down the road they are with their games, that's certainly their perogative and they'll probably be highly successful, the issue that the RPG crowd has is that they aren't going to be making RPGs anymore and as such should stop trying to push them as such. I subscribe completely to this view.
This is one of these fallacies put forward by people at RPG Codex: the notion that an RPG must give you the options to do whatever you want in a free universe. CRPGs are not pen and paper gaming. They probably never will be. You can scream to the heavens all you want that Diablo is not an RPG, but the majority of gamers won't agree with you on that. For whatever reason, the very definition of RPG has changed to mean a game where you can develop the stats/skills of the character over time. Anything that meets that requirement is deemed an RPG by the majority of gamers and by the industry. When it comes to definitions like this, majority rules. Bethesda properly promoted Oblivion as an RPG because by current standards, it is an RPG.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whacker
Sorry, but this is crap. "Real-time" does not equal better. "Twitch-based" does not equal better. "Developing" does not mean switching away from a proven, tried and true workable turn-based system that represents the core of whatever it is that's being worked on. There's something to be said for "If it ain't broke, don't fix it", and not making changes just for the sake of making changes, which given Beth's statements and arrogance is exactly what I fear they will do. This really annoys me when people equate "real-time" with new hotness and "turn-based" with old and busted.
I never said real-time was better. I've always been a huge turn-based strategy fan and I'm currently spending all my free time playing a classic style hex game. I don't understand how you got the idea that I dislike turn-based games. Sounds to me like you don't like my opinion and are seeing demons in my words.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whacker
So taking what I think the intent of your statement is here here, what exactly do you think you've been playing over the past umpteen years? Please don't tell me that "the TW games aren't the same thing over and over and over" because they are. Quake? Doom? Heh. Counter-strike 1 and Source? If anything those games prove that people DO play the same stuff over and over again and they lap it up like nectar.
I'm not saying things have to change every single year, no matter what. Change for the sake of being different isn't the point. It's about innovation and thinking of new ways of doing things that no one has done before. To a certain extent there are broad genres that encompass everything, but that doesn't mean that it's always been the same thing over and over again. Are all FPS shooters the same as Wolfenstein 3D? If you define them in a very broad sense, sure, but if you compare their actual entertainment and artistic value, most are very different from one another.
The Fallout engine (dunno the name of it) evolved into the Infinity engine, which most people would probably agree was better in every aspect. The Infinity engine itself evolved into the Aurora engine, which has turned out to be good for certain games, and bad for others (IMO). Does that mean that Jade Empire is the same game as Fallout? Not even close, but one is a direct descendant of the other. Change, be it big or small, keeps life interesting. It's rare for an entire genre to die (even Adventure gaming is still hanging on) and it's rare for a new genre to be born (RTS and MMO are the most recent additions I can think of, and even they are very old now). That doesn't mean that advancements can't be made within a genre though.
If a change is bad, the market will generally reject it and it will die. If a change is good, the market will generally embrace it and it will grow. It is a shame that sometimes the market won't like the same things we do as individuals, but that's not the fault of the companies that make the games.
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
I read in the forums that F3 will be released for consoles as well.
Let me know please, if there are any games which didn't screw up after having console versions additionally. :embarassed:
I take console gaming industry more of action-packed, due to both controller limitations and the sole idea of consoles "easy & quick entertainment". So deciding to release a game's console versions thoroughly changes the production process of a game. And I fear such change may...Uuhh..I really don't want to imagine that. :toilet:
P.S. FM 2007 has been a disaster. Guess what, it's the first time the series was planned for consoles as well from the start.
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
I can see why RPG fans would find the FPS gameplay of Oblivion not to their liking, however I would agree with Econ that the TES games have always been that style. For me they were perfect as I had played NWN and become gradually bored with watching the characters jump around and jab each other, whilst all I could do was cast the occasional spell. TES allowed me to really become immersed in an RPG for the first time (though NWN was stiil a good game), and Oblivion took that further with more satisfying combat, especially archery, better conversations and more varied quests. The addition of some truly original mods such as Cats and rats, natural environments and dwemer specatcles topped it all off. I seriously hope similar plugins are available for fallout 3.
Back on topic... Despite my love for FPS RPGs I still have the urge to check out the first two fallouts. Since i don't want to spend any money yet, I thought I would check out the demos. Does anybody know whether they are compatible with XP (n.b. I know froggy's queries have already been answered, but the demos are unlikely to have been upgraded, unlike the latest retail version)?
Edit: For some rersason I dodn't notice the numerous posts below Econ's when I posted this so its a bit of an out of date response. The question above still stands though. Also I do know of a pc/console game that is good: Thief Deadly Shadows. Despised by much of the Thief hardcore yet its what got me into the series in the frst place, and its still a damn fine game.
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Hehe - you really made me dig out these CD-ROMs again, guys ~:) (thanks also for the tips, Whacker.
It seems that FO2 is running properly under XP however I do not have any sound for FO1 - apparently I have to manually configure my "soundcard" ... tried a lot of combinations without satisfying results ~:(
Any recommendations?
:bow:
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftEyeNine
Let me know please, if there are any games which didn't screw up after having console versions additionally. :embarassed:[/SIZE]
Morrowind. It was released for PC and Xbox at the same time and didn't suffer (IMO) from the process. That said, Morrowind was clearly designed for the PC first and then ported to the console. Oblivion was designed for both console and PC at the same time, and I was very much annoyed with the size of the fonts and other such things which were clearly due to console compatibility.
PC games which get ported to consoles aren't really impacted at all but, like you, I definitely grit my teeth when I hear that a game I am looking forward to will be designed for both at the same time. Fortunately in Oblivion there were mods out within days that addressed the main problems I had with the residual 'consoleness' of the game. I would expect the same from Fallout 3.
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Quote:
Originally Posted by TinCow
This is one of these fallacies put forward by people at RPG Codex: the notion that an RPG must give you the options to do whatever you want in a free universe. CRPGs are not pen and paper gaming. They probably never will be. You can scream to the heavens all you want that Diablo is not an RPG, but the majority of gamers won't agree with you on that. For whatever reason, the very definition of RPG has changed to mean a game where you can develop the stats/skills of the character over time. Anything that meets that requirement is deemed an RPG by the majority of gamers and by the industry. When it comes to definitions like this, majority rules. Bethesda properly promoted Oblivion as an RPG because by current standards, it is an RPG.
Again, this is where I submit that the term "RPG" is one of the most misused, bastardized, thrown-around terms in the game industry today. Stat/skill development does NOT define an RPG, it's much more than that, and that's the problem that we have. Pen and paper doesn't define an RPG either. In the same vein, 1 million angry twitch-style gamers who've never experienced a real RPG before screaming that Oblivion is an RPG, doesn't make it one. I suspect that this issue really boils down to being an impasse at some point.
Quote:
I never said real-time was better. I've always been a huge turn-based strategy fan and I'm currently spending all my free time playing a classic style hex game. I don't understand how you got the idea that I dislike turn-based games. Sounds to me like you don't like my opinion and are seeing demons in my words.
Then that's simply my misinterpretation. I'm trying to read your statements, take them at their meaning and not try to assume too much based on the entirity of your post. I read thost particular statements to mean what I said earlier, that real-time = better, hence the "demons in your words."
For the record I wouldn't be opposed to something like the NWN/KOTOR "real time turn" system, but it'd need to have some significant changes to fully implement the SPECIAL system and combat mechanics. Honestly I think that'd be pretty awesome, BUT it would also be very easy to screw up completely.
Quote:
I'm not saying things have to change every single year, no matter what. Change for the sake of being different isn't the point. It's about innovation and thinking of new ways of doing things that no one has done before. To a certain extent there are broad genres that encompass everything, but that doesn't mean that it's always been the same thing over and over again. Are all FPS shooters the same as Wolfenstein 3D? If you define them in a very broad sense, sure, but if you compare their actual entertainment and artistic value, most are very different from one another.
The Fallout engine (dunno the name of it) evolved into the Infinity engine, which most people would probably agree was better in every aspect. The Infinity engine itself evolved into the Aurora engine, which has turned out to be good for certain games, and bad for others (IMO). Does that mean that Jade Empire is the same game as Fallout? Not even close, but one is a direct descendant of the other. Change, be it big or small, keeps life interesting. It's rare for an entire genre to die (even Adventure gaming is still hanging on) and it's rare for a new genre to be born (RTS and MMO are the most recent additions I can think of, and even they are very old now). That doesn't mean that advancements can't be made within a genre though.
If a change is bad, the market will generally reject it and it will die. If a change is good, the market will generally embrace it and it will grow. It is a shame that sometimes the market won't like the same things we do as individuals, but that's not the fault of the companies that make the games.
OK, if I take THOSE statements you just made, I wholeheartedly agree. Change in the way of real innovation is always good, and needed for the industry and gaming to advance. The problem that I had, and how I was reading your previous statements and intent, was something along the lines of "huge/radical changes are needed for this to be successful and enjoyable", hence my disagreement. I'd LOVE to see this in gorgeous 3D, gritty atmosphere and all, with lifelike surround sound and another soundtrack that stays on my ipod forever.
My problem is again that I do not want to see this holiest of holies butchered by ignoring/removing the core elements of what it represents. A perfect example of what I fear is another Deus Ex. The original was and still is one of the best PC games that many of us have experienced, and is consistently in the top of the top-x game lists whenever another rag or site coughes them up. Compare that to it's sequel, which by all accounts failed miserably, which I submit was due to the developers losing sight of and failing to account for the core elements of what Deus Ex was and represented. That and I blame the Xbox... but that's another argument.
@ LEN
KOTOR1 stands out as an example of a game that was very well done on both PC and console. The console version played well, and the PC version had an excellent, tailored interface that worked exceptionally well, and the graphics scaled. The gameplay was done in such a way that it just felt right when I played it on the PC, and again when I tried it on my friends xbrick. In the same vein as above, Deus Ex 2, Thief 3, and Oblivion stand out as games that in my view (and in their dev's views in some cases) utterly failed at having effective controls and interfaces between the platforms, where it was clear to me that the console was heavily favored. Simple does not = better.
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Well F2 rarely causes any problems on XP however I have come across with black screen problems several times with F1. Just never leave for a game without your patches. For F1 and F2 there. (Since I don't know which language version you have, I gave the category link. Download the ones saying "offical")
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
It seems that running the 1.1 patch in compability modus did the trick :beam:
Thanks a lot!
:bow:
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
Lionheart
Apologies for wandering off topic, but I've not seem anyone mention this game here before and it doesn't seem worth starting a new topic on it.
Did anyone play it? If so, how was it? Back when it was released I couldn't afford it and I had other games to play between exams. I have vague recollections of liking the demo. Much the same situation as Arcanum: of steamworks and magick obscura ended up in ~:(
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Quote:
Originally Posted by frogbeastegg
Apologies for wandering off topic, but I've not seem anyone mention this game here before and it doesn't seem worth starting a new topic on it.
Did anyone play it? If so, how was it? Back when it was released I couldn't afford it and I had other games to play between exams. I have vague recollections of liking the demo. Much the same situation as Arcanum: of steamworks and magick obscura ended up in ~:(
I played it, most of it that is, I wasn't really overwhelmed though and stopped in the end because that part(don't want to spoil it) seemed almost impossible to do with my melee character.
Well, I got it with a gaming magazine and I actually wouldn't have paid a lot more for it, it felt a bit old and the gameplay, AI etc weren't really great either IMO.
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Quote:
Originally Posted by frogbeastegg
I have vague recollections of liking the demo. Much the same situation as Arcanum: of steamworks and magick obscura ended up in ~:(
Not wanting to sound contrary, but I disliked the Lionheart demo so much I never got the game; the word of mouth was also abysmal. It was clearly repetitive hack n slash and not very good hack n slash. Arcanum, however, I still consider a flawed classic - the mournful music, unique atmosphere and wonderful courtly dialogue made up for its many flaws. I don't think Lionheart had any such virtues.
I've just realised: a lot of the Fallout team went to form Troika, who made Arcanum and Vampire Bloodlines. Vampire Bloodlines is pretty much exactly what I'd hope a first person real time Fallout 3 would be. Based on Morrowind/Oblivion, I can see Bethesda - on a good day - matching Bloodlines for atmosphere and combat (great and not so great respectively). But I don't see much sign of them being able to match the dialogue, sidequests and characters. However, I won't write them off as Morrowind/Oblivion are in many ways extraordinarily impressive games.
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Quote:
Originally Posted by econ21
I've just realised: a lot of the Fallout team went to form Troika, who made Arcanum and Vampire Bloodlines. Vampire Bloodlines is pretty much exactly what I'd hope a first person real time Fallout 3 would be. Based on Morrowind/Oblivion, I can see Bethesda - on a good day - matching Bloodlines for atmosphere and combat (great and not so great respectively). But I don't see much sign of them being able to match the dialogue, sidequests and characters. However, I won't write them off as Morrowind/Oblivion are in many ways extraordinarily impressive games.
Yeah, I was pretty bummed when Troika was dismantled. I was very impressed with the TOEE engine and was hoping to see a new wave of epic D&D games (ala Baldur's Gate and Planescape: Tormet) using the new engine. Ah well, at least those games make the Total War games look totally bug-free, by comparison! :laugh4:
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
Quote:
Originally Posted by econ21
I disliked the Lionheart demo so much I never got the game; the word of mouth was also abysmal. It was clearly repetitive hack n slash and not very good hack n slash. Arcanum, however, I still consider a flawed classic - the mournful music, unique atmosphere and wonderful courtly dialogue made up for its many flaws. I don't think Lionheart had any such virtues.
~:eek: We have very similar taste in RPGs, so I'm inclinded to doubt my memory here, especially with Hussar's comments thrown in. I must have been thinking about a different game demo. I've started a new topic so I can stop hijacking this one.
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
I am also very skeptical about the FO3, for much of the reasons Whacker mentioned in that I do not like the direction that Bethesda is taking. I loved Daggerfall and Morrowind, but I quit playing Oblivion in less than two weeks and never looked back. Morrowind had less exploration and quests than Daggerfall, but there was an incentive to keep on playing so that you can improve your character and tackle the things that used to squish you earlier in the game. With monster scaling in Oblivion, that was gone too, and coupled with some other design decisions it all felt incredibly shallow. Why would I want to keep playing and leveling up if a) I could do whatever I want right from the beginning without much worry that I'll be involved in something I cannot handle, and b) if the same goblin cave feels just the same and takes just as much effort to go through on level 1 as it does on level 10? IMO, that's just saps all motivation and that feeling-good-about-myself feeling from the game, as there is basically no progress. The monsters and gear may look different, but there is no tangible difference to them whatsoever.
That said, I wouldn't mind if FO3 is a first-person game in a Fallout setting (though I cannot fathom why the turn-based tactical genre is all but dead these days). A good first-person post-apocalyptic RPG could be great fun if done right. I just don't have high hopes that it will have the depth and the RPG system to make it an immersive and enjoyable experience given the Bethesda's recent track record.
Also, sorry for sidetracking the thread a bit:
From some of the posts in this thread, I take it that somebody has made a mod to remove the level scaling of monsters/environment in Oblivion? If so, would somebody be so kind to direct me to it? I might give Oblivion another go if this was in fact fixed.
-
Re: Vaults have a visitor again..
I'll clarify one point. If they give us the ability to do stuff first person, I don't think I'd care one whit, features = good. BUT, combat should be turn-based, top-down.
hrvojej, I do agree, in that my concern for this comes mainly from it being developed by Bethesda. There are a lot of people who keep saying debate and speculation is pointless, I think much of that is coming from them announcing the game and not giving any details or information to go on whatsoever, probably part of the hype machine at work. As for some saying the comparison between Oblivion and FO3 isn't fair, it's completely fair. After all, Oblivion is Beth's cash cow, and the style of gameplay is arguably what sucked in a much larger fanbase than the last game, which is precisely what scares me. Further, other say that "complaining" or "whining" now before we have details is pointless, as someone else pointed out in their own forums, "Would you rather we wait until they're much farther along in the design phase and have decided on certain aspects of the game (mistakes, as they put it), or that we make some noise now in hopes that it is heard and taken into account, before the 'mistakes' have taken too much root and would be impossible to change at that point?", or something along those lines. That's essentially my view.
Slightly but not exactly offtopic, saw this link over at NMA earlier, thought it was pretty sweet. http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...und+Zero&hl=en
In many ways, that would be what I'd like to see FO3 evolve. Chunky gooey 3D goodness, pretty slick camera design, non-hex based pathing system... Combat seemed pretty rough but not too bad at all. Deformable/destructable environments = :2thumbsup:
Cheers
:balloon2:
