Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[KvP]

Screenies!








Looks like they still haven't gotten over their bloom fetish. Hopefully they'll have that cleaned up by release.

[Narr]

That last screenshot is discomforting to me, I'll be honest.  It looks like that guy in the power suit (if that's what it is) is a star wars stormtrooper and the first person perspecting seems too much like a gameplay device rather than simply another point of view for dramatic effect.

[ackblom12]

I'm more annoyed by the fact that the Super Mutants are just Orcs and Cave Trolls.

Meh, I'm gonna end up enjoying it one way or the other.

Oh God please.

[Johnny C]

first person perspecting seems too much like a gameplay device rather than simply another point of view for dramatic effect.

Heaven forbid, right?

[Spluff]

Blegh. It's oblivion meets star wars. Ah well, might be a decent game if I scribble out the word fallout on the box and replace it with 'generic shooter'.

Also, turns out that screenie I posted WAS zoomed in. Fourth one down has him.

[Storm Rider]

I'm sorry, but how does anything about those screenshots evoke Star Wars?

[Spluff]

The power armor looks like storm trooper armor, the vault suit is reminiscent of the rebel alliance uniforms, and the whole cheesy feel to it all just makes me think Star Wars.

[pannic]

um.  Wait.  Are you implying that Fallout wasn't cheesy? 
When did this happen?
Fallout had to be taken with a glass of red wine, or else the taste of cheese would have been overpowering.

[KvP]

Fallout wasn't cheesy at all. In fact, it was quite dark in tone.

[Alex C]

I think it depends on if you played Fallout 2 first or if at all. The first one's humor is pitch black, for the most part while the second one has a lot more pop culture references, easter eggs and a lighter tone overall.

[KvP]

Certainly. In most playthroughs you'll get at least one special Monty Python encounter. Plus, talking scorpions / plants and the like. The fanbois have a point in that Black Isle deviated quite a bit from the first game in tone, but overall I thought it stayed consistent enough. Those first few playthroughs it didn't matter. It's still an excellent game in spite of the somewhat frequent bad ideas.

[Alex C]

Agreed; I've actually played Fallout 2 more than the first. Fallout 1 was an indelible experience, but there was more stuff to goof around with in the second, and I think there was a certain amount of wisdom involved with switching things up. Fallout 1 nailed the mythos perfectly, I think, and I really wasn't sure they had anywhere else to go after its completion; the story already had an excellent ending, the kind that the setting's internal logic demanded, which ironically is something we so rarely get to enjoy due to the kneejerk impulse to staple on a happy ending or artificial sense of closure. I guess I'm saying that Fallout 1 was so satisfying for me that it felt perfectly natural to treat the sequel as more of a highly enjoyable victory lap than a true successor. I wasn't in any way disappointed either; I mean, shit, I got to shoot a pissed off super intelligent mutant rat in the balls with a shotgun. Good times.

[Stryc9Fuego]

The Monty Python references, Mad Max cameos, troll/ogre super mutants, and general lunacy don't matter. They can deviate from the main games in any way they want. First person, third person, 3D, sprites... but there's one thing they can never change.

War. War never changes.


(>sniff, sniff< who left all this CHEESE here?)

[Narr]

first person perspecting seems too much like a gameplay device rather than simply another point of view for dramatic effect.

Heaven forbid, right?

Yes.  I want turn-based action-point CRPG action, goddamn it.  There hasn't been many good CRPGs in this millenia, and a throwback to things that were genuinely witty AND difficult AND had good pacing would be awesome.  I'm burnt out on first person shooters what with all the good ones released this last year.  STALKER, Orange Box, Call of Duty 4, Bioshock?  I don't want Fallout: Oblivion.  I want Fallout 3.

Understand where my forboding sense of dread comes from?

Don't get me wrong.  Oblivion was very fun and I enjoyed it.  Repainting it with the Fallout universe (which they've significantly altered from the look of it) would really irk my chain.

Oh and about Star Wars:  Seriously, tell me that guy in the power armor in that photo doesn't look like a Dark Trooper from the old Star Wars: Dark Forces game.

[The extra letter]

Hey, at least they still have the little wheel on the back of the power armour.

[Jackie Blue]

I don't want Fallout: Oblivion.  I want Fallout 3.

Exactly.  So far it looks like they're just raping the Fallout name and its legend to bolster the sales of Yet Another Sci-Fi First-Person Pseudo-RPG Type Thing.

[Ozymandias]

Guys.

You're annoying.

Just saying.

I'll be happy to play a good game when it comes out and not give a rat's ass if it's "Fallout".

[Johnny C]

Heaven forbid, right?

Yes.  I want turn-based action-point CRPG action, goddamn it.

But why? Why would you want a throwback when we're living in a different decade? Games have come pretty damn far since Fallout, dude. The series is allowed to move with the times, and it's entitled to, whether fans like it (based, by the way, entirely on advance press) or not.

[Storm Rider]

Exactly. That style of game is dead largely because technology and subsequently the market has moved beyond it. Whatever the fuck it's called (and I might be biased here because I've never played the first two), if it's a good game then who cares? As far as I'm concerned, Fallout 3 addresses every problem I had with Oblivion (dull combat, an extremely generic fantasy setting and surrounding fiction, and the totally broken levelling system), and fixes it. So I'm excited.

[Johnny C]

Fair warning: If I see another word printed about "BUT IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THE FIRST TWO GAMES" in this thread, I'll probably just quote you and replace your text with this:

A BLOO BLA BLOO BLOOO

[Jackie Blue]

So Johnny, you wouldn't mind if the next wacky Will Ferrell movie was Citizen Kane 2?

Just sayin', you know.  Just sayin'.

[Johnny C]

I didn't mind Aliens, dig?

[Jackie Blue]

Ohhh.  Nicely played.  Alright, you win this round, you rogue.

[KvP]

first person perspecting seems too much like a gameplay device rather than simply another point of view for dramatic effect.

Heaven forbid, right?

He's actually referring to what was promised by Bethesda, namely that third-person would be a viable perspective for playing the game. What he's saying is, it looks like that's not the case.

I didn't mind Aliens, dig?

This isn't a property passing hands from Ridley Scott to James Cameron. This is a property changing hands from Kubrick to Brett Ratner.

But why? Why would you want a throwback when we're living in a different decade? Games have come pretty damn far since Fallout, dude. The series is allowed to move with the times, and it's entitled to, whether fans like it (based, by the way, entirely on advance press) or not.

That argument only goes so far. What we're taking issue with is Bethsoft fixing what isn't broken, or more accurately, defacing what's perfect. For some, it's isometric perspective or turn-based combat, something that I don't really take issue with, although SPECIAL is built around turn-based gameplay and stands to be significantly altered. I mostly care about the aesthetic laid down by Boyarski that enraptured me so much as a child, which looks like it's being scrapped where all other aspects of the game seem to be getting some sort of Bethsoft attention.

And there's also dialogue and its trees, something integral to Fallout's gameplay, and something that Bethesda hasn't touched in any form for at least 12 years.

I mean, if you want to argue that the type of game that Bethsoft makes is better than the type of game Fallout is, then that's fine.

[Johnny C]

IN ORDER:

In theory, you could play Metal Gear Solid 3 almost entirely from a third-person perspective. However, it doesn't really look like that's not the case since there's the one shot from a first person perspective.

Yeah, except Ridley Scott -> James Cameron actually happened. We can speculate all we want but the fact is that the franchise changed hands. Rather than bitch and moan about it, we should maybe wait to see what happens? Who knows, one of us could lead a charmed life and as a result we'll all be pleasantly surprised.

The aesthetic does look a bit different, which is basically the biggest thing I'll concede to you - the vaccuum-tube charm of the games is remarkably tough to nail down, though, and frankly I'm willing to give Bethseda credit for simply trying.

And because I promised it,

A BLOO BLOO BLA BLOO

[Storm Rider]

What I take issue with is that people blame Bethesda for the fact that they aren't getting a 'true' Fallout 3 when they should be blaming Interplay. Basically, aside from their RPG wing, every publishing decision they made was shit. Not just mediocre, but fully shit. (Well, except for Descent if you're into that type of thing.) On top of that, their management had no fucking idea how to run a goddamn business or treat their employees properly. Interplay were the people who put the knife in the old Fallout style, not Bethesda. Nobody was going to make a Fallout game in the style of 1 and 2 when Interplay's festering corpse finally decided to sell the rights off because as we said before, the technology had moved beyond it. The only platform where I think that genre even has a possibility of coming back is the DS, and you know people would have bitched if they had put it there even if the gameplay was fundamentally similar.

[KvP]

Certainly Herve Caen is responsible for the dissolution of Black Isle (along with Westwood and several other studios) but they are a non-entity now, for all intents and purposes. Bethesda is fully in control. What they do with the property is fully their responsibility.

Btw, new version of The Fallout 2 Restoration Project is out, adds some new fixes.

[KvP]

Executive Producer Todd Howard's given some updates.

 - Apparently the game is finished, as far as "expanding the borders of the game" go. It still needs to be filled in and polished. They're saying Fall '08 is a "definite".

 - The game is twice as long as they had originally planned. As big as Oblivion, 20 hour main plotline, 100 hours or so all told.

 - 1 NPC companion at any one time, not including Dogmeat.

...
Damn, what a waste of a 1,001th post.

[MusicScribbles]

He actually never said that it was as big as Oblivion, he said in the recent OXM podcast that it isn't as big as Oblivion. He said the game is definitely much larger than they originally planned, but it really isn't close to the immense world of Oblivion.
The game is larger because of the over 200 endings that they currently are working with in the game. That is something he did say.

[Spluff]

200 endings? Now that's probably the best thing I've hear so far.

[ackblom12]

You do realize that the 200 endings are probably more along the lines of 200 variations of 8 - 12 (a perfectly solid number of endings as long as they don't suck) endings right? In essence a complete and total bullshit claim?

[Spluff]

Still, it shows that they do care, at least somewhat. If they were just in it for the money they could have just given it one ending (and the vault dweller killed them all and lived happily ever after).

[ackblom12]

I think the fact they bought a very very niche cult classic franchise and were ecstatic to make a sequel shows that more than making a total bullshit claim.

Making a bullshit claim like that just means he's talking in Peter Molyneux native language, which is never a good thing.

[MusicScribbles]

Man, I'm going to post the link to that OXM podcast now.
The guy said there are over 200 endings, but he also says that they are all grown from the 12 endings that they originally had planned.
Here it is.

[Scruffy]

I'm just here to say this.
I was playing Oblivion the other day and thought, this is a lot like Fallout. 
Don't even ask me why, but somehow I thought, Fallout. 
Free roaming, do your own quests, get to know the people.  Travel from town to town, completely free to go where you want, when you want.
I don't know, to me that was the essence of Fallout.  It was never JUST about ___Punk whatever whatever.  I mean, that stuff just takes a graphics artists.  It was about the atmosphere and the gameplay.

/I know what I've done.  *Cigarette and Blindfold on*

[Narr]

Well, there's truth in that.  A lot of Fallout's charm, though, was the setting.  You have to admit it.  Besides being a sound RPG, it simply made you laugh.

I mean, the game gives you a sex skill level.  How awesome is that?

[Spluff]

Oblivion was Fallout without the atmosphere, humor, memorable characters or interesting plots.

[Scruffy]

Oblivion was Fallout without the atmosphere, humor, memorable characters or interesting plots.

I'll give you humour and memorable characters, but oblivion really has a cool plot and it's atmosphere is really engrossing in my opinion.  Course, when you accidently get someone killed and loot his body, and rob his house, I can't help but chuckle in a distinctly Fallout way.  Sort of like placing explosives on merchants after robbing them blind.  It's wrong, but funny.

Well, there's truth in that.  A lot of Fallout's charm, though, was the setting.  You have to admit it.  Besides being a sound RPG, it simply made you laugh.

I mean, the game gives you a sex skill level.  How awesome is that?

I definately agree.  The settings, artistry and music were just supurb.  The sex skill was sadening though lol 

[Lord Orange]

seeing how I love both fallout and oblivion, I'm going to enjoy fallout3 even with the annoying alterations.  and also because S.T.A.L.K.E.R. was compared to a mix of fallout and oblivion, this only heightens my expectations.  I'm defiantly going to enjoy the ability to customize my character's appearance.

[Scandanavian War Machine]

I'm defiantly going to enjoy the ability to customize my character's appearance.

either that's a typo, or you chose to rebel against "the man" in a very subtle way.

[Lord Orange]

Probably typo. I am not inglesh good

[Fletch]

If I recall correctly & they're following the FO2 model, 200 endings means 1-2 endings with a number of quests that toggle "good" or "bad" results for whatever faction...

[Red Peril]

The Fallout 3 debate actually reminds me of the debates about Fallout 2, Baldur's Gate 2 or shit even Half Life 2, everyone expected those games to be pathetic pale shadows of their predecessors and it never came true. Everyone just wants Fallout 3 to be abysmal just so they can prove to everyone they loved the original games more and always have done so they can seem smarter than most people. As for Bethesda doing a good job with the story sure I might not be that optimistic, but the main reason why the characterisation in Oblivion was so poor was because they spent all there time making a totally new engine, with more time I doubt it will be quite so feeble, and the main storyline of Morrowind wasn't to bad either. I don't expect the storytelling to be in the same league as Fallout 1 or 2, but I can say that of any game that has been announced in the last year and they weren't mercilessly crucified. And another thing too, the action is going to be better; I don't care if it's shallow, an RPG videogame is still a videogame, not a table top RPG, and I wan't it to play like one. The same goes for people complaining about it being 3D, an extra dimension doesn't make a bad game, bad design does. If it comes out and you think it's just horrible then I'll accept your opinion, but complaining before the fact is just ridiculous.

[Evander]

Is there any idea how it compares between systems?

I'm still undecided on whether to get it for 360 or PS3.

[est]

I don't want Fallout: Oblivion.  I want Fallout 3.

Unfortunately I haven't played either of the first two Fallout games & really enjoyed Oblivion.  From what you guys have been saying in my RPG thread I would love Fallout: Oblivion, so please excuse me if I seem a little chipper about all of this.

[Spluff]

From what I've seen the problem isn't that it's Fallout:Oblivion (which would be pretty good), it'd be Oblivion:Generic Post-Apocalyptic Setting.

[JJXB]

bethesda don't seem the right people to do a fallout game but they couldn't do any worse in ruining the fallout name than interplay by the end of the line (fallout: POS for PS2 and xbox demonstrate that much). i'll still be pissed if it's crap. *revs up chainsaw and heads for the interplay head office*

[Fletch]

I don't expect the storytelling to be in the same league as Fallout 1 or 2, but [other sub-standard game storylines] weren't mercilessly crucified.

There is a thriving business in crap movies & crap books, too - does that mean we should be happy some people are working to the lowest common denomenator?
I actually think I'm going to enjoy the game, but I won'tfill in the blanks of "200 endings" & other airy promises with blind trust.

[Dimmukane]

For clarification, the way the 200 endings works is based off of the original 9-12.  Minor and major changes happen to those endings based on your choices in the game, and there's a fuckton of choices, so they got up to 204 (I think) before they said 'stop, we've gotten carried away with ourselves'.

[Spluff]

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.'s was pretty cool.

In many ways, stalker was pretty damn similar to Fallout.