Smerlus, I agree pretty much wholeheartedly with just about every point you made there. Fallout had alot of flaws, and it'll be really nice to see them fixed. That's not what this is about. This is about roleplaying, feel, and staying true to the spirit of the franchise, which many people are convinced Bethesda is incapable of doing.

Fryer10, that post isn't going to do nearly as much to convice Fallout fans as you hope. The fact that "Mega levels of violence" is number one on their priority list is really frightening. as is the fact that they removed the GURPS aspect of it. As well as the fact that "It's Open Ended" and "The player will have a goal" actually have to be put on that list. Fallout has ridiculous levels of violence, yes, and Bloody Mess is everyone's favorite perk, but the violence wasn't the focus of the game, and they'll probably end up being forced to tone down the violence anyways due to today's political climate. it shouldn't be that high on their list. The fact that they removed the Roleplaying game system from a roleplaying game is disturbing for obvious reasons. The last two shouldn't even have to be listed, Open-endedness is pretty much a requirement for a good RPG, and giving the player a goal is pretty much a requirement for any story-based game.

Mediocre_man90

mediocre thats not the bethesda fallout team speaking, thats the original document from the original fallout team.

A 1998 game vs a 2004 game....

Dawn of War has advantages because of better technology than Starcraft did at the time. However, I had much more fun in 1998 and after with Starcraft than I did with DoW in 2004 to present.

Skeptomania

oh wow lol this pretty much sums it up for me rofl nice skeptomania.

100 percent true.

Quotes taken directly from the Fallout3 Team of Devs. As you can see bethesda will keep whatever made the originals so great.

Obviously we had the old games to look at, and Fallout 1 became our main model and inspiration. I always preferred the tone of it, and it's the one we focused our time on dissecting. We also went through all the original source material, as well as the "Fallout Bible," put together by Chris Avellone, whose work is always fantastic. But one of my favorite sources, when we received everything (yes, everything) from Interplay, is the original "Fallout Vision Statement", back when it was called "Fallout: A GURPS Post Nuclear Adventure." This is the document detailing what Fallout was to be, and is a 14-point bulleted list. Here they are, in order, with direct quotes (enjoy - I know I did):

1. Mega levels of violence. "When people die, they don't just die - they get cut in half, they melt into a pile of goo, explode like a blood sausage, or several different ways - depending on the weapon you use."
2. There is often no right solution. "Like it or not, the player will not be able to make everyone live happily ever after. "
3. There will always be multiple solutions. "No one ****of play will be perfect."

The others are: "The players actions affect the world.", "There is a sense of urgency," "It's open ended," "The player will have a goal," "The player has control of his actions," "Simple Interface," "Speech will be lip-synched with the animation," "A wide variety of weapons and actions," "Detailed character creation rules," "just enough GURPS material to make the GURPSers happy. The game comes first." That one is actually crossed out in the document, as they dropped GURPS, and lastly:

14. "The Team is Motivated" "We want to do this. We care about this game and we will make it cool."

Ten years later and I don't know that I would change a word of what we want to do today. Especially that last one. We have an incredibly passionate and amazing group here; I've been privileged to work with many of them for over a decade. Hopefully in another 10 years people will look back and say, "Nope, they didn't screw it up." Hopefully.

[QUOTE="Mediocre_man90"][QUOTE="Fryer10"]

Number1- I said if they made the game like the old one with just new graphics nobody would buy because turnbased games are DEAD.

Fryer10

Really now? last I checked, Fire Emblem was doing pretty damn well for Nintendo over on the console side. That's turn-based. KotOR was essentially turn-based, when you get down to it. seems pretty far from death if you ask me.

2nd. How is it dumbing down in interactivity? you can make weapons with about anything you pick up? and dont even compare it to oblivion's interactivness because the only similarity is they are usin the same engine, gameplay will be coooomplllleeetley different.

Fryer10

okay, in Fallout you can do pretty much anything you can think of. get married? check. Sell your new wife into slavery? check. wander from city to city, killing everything that moves? check. Best part is, the game changes to reflect all of these decisions. Fallout was made in a time where games didn't hold your hand and make sure you don't break anything. If you kill an important character, it isn't going to restart from the last time you saved, it's going to assume you meant to kill that person and adjust accordingly. Games just aren't made like that anymore.

Then why do you think bethesda will drop all of those things? if thats what made the game great then they will keep it. You are all assuming since its 3rd person and made by people who made oblivion then it was will the same. Same engine/developers does not mean similar gameplay at allll.

It is turnbased.... and please people re-read this. Makes a very good point. And fatshodan i was just giving you an example of interactivness. im terribly sorry you thought that thats what the only interactivness of the game was. of course there is more.

[QUOTE="Fryer10"]

Number1- I said if they made the game like the old one with just new graphics nobody would buy because turnbased games are DEAD.

Mediocre_man90

Really now? last I checked, Fire Emblem was doing pretty damn well for Nintendo over on the console side. That's turn-based. KotOR was essentially turn-based, when you get down to it. seems pretty far from death if you ask me.

2nd. How is it dumbing down in interactivity? you can make weapons with about anything you pick up? and dont even compare it to oblivion's interactivness because the only similarity is they are usin the same engine, gameplay will be coooomplllleeetley different.

Fryer10

okay, in Fallout you can do pretty much anything you can think of. get married? check. Sell your new wife into slavery? check. wander from city to city, killing everything that moves? check. Best part is, the game changes to reflect all of these decisions. Fallout was made in a time where games didn't hold your hand and make sure you don't break anything. If you kill an important character, it isn't going to restart from the last time you saved, it's going to assume you meant to kill that person and adjust accordingly. Games just aren't made like that anymore.

Then why do you think bethesda will drop all of those things? if thats what made the game great then they will keep it. You are all assuming since its 3rd person and made by people who made oblivion then it was will the same. Same engine/developers does not mean similar gameplay at allll.

[QUOTE="Fryer10"]

WOOOOW are you guys serious???

Do you really want another game like the originals with what? better graphics, new storyline?

That game would be horrible, you guys are lost in the old days and i bet if they made the game suitin to your needs it would sell 1million copys in....forever.fatshodan

I haven't read every post in this thread, but I don't think anyone has a problem with the visual changes made to the series, and those who do - if indeed there are any - can't defend their stance with legitimate points.

All the new games are all about Interactivness and creativity/graphics.Fryer10

Fallout 3 is actually dumbing down on the interactivity in a big, big way. Fallout was more interactive - in terms of how you interact with other characters and the game world - than Fallout 3 will ever dream of.

Number1- I said if they made the game like the old one with just new graphics nobody would buy because turnbased games are DEAD.

2nd. How is it dumbing down in interactivity? you can make weapons with about anything you pick up? and dont even compare it to oblivion's interactivness because the only similarity is they are usin the same engine, gameplay will be coooomplllleeetley different.

WOOOOW are you guys serious???

Do you really want another game like the originals with what? better graphics, new storyline?

That game would be horrible, you guys are lost in the old days and i bet if they made the game suitin to your needs it would sell 1million copys in....forever.

All the new games are all about Interactivness and creativity/graphics.

GET OVER IT!!! FALLOUT was like it was because it didnt have the hardware to actually be played 3rd person or it would look like a ton of 3d blocks (like ps1). None to say the least, a very crappy looking version of half life. So please accept the fact that the isometric Level Turn-based games for next-gen consoles ARE DEAD!

CLICK, WATCH, HAM FTW!

Stevendawg

lol so true except its more like this.

CLICK, WATCH, LOBSTER FTW, COLLECT BONES, BURY, GET LOOT FTW PL0X!

We got a bunch of graphics whores here!

Runescape has a bunch of cool quests and features. It isn't that bad........people are just biased.

Oh noez! The kiddy game! Look how cool I am by playing WoW!

lettuceman44

haha i know, i mean anybody know why the wii is woopin every1's butt in console and software sales? its not the graphics, which actually are really sweet and i think super mario galaxy outdid some of the 360's first games, mostly the 3rd party japanese games btw :D. But it's obviously a combination of decent lookin graphics and innovative addictive gameplay.