If you had to, which part of fallout would you sacrifice?

N

Nonagon

Still Mildly Glowing
In other words, if Beth said they had to leave out a part, which would you rather have taken out in f3? Just choose one. (If I missed any I didn't think of just let me know and I'll add them)

1.Turn Based
2.Isometric View
3.Branching Dialog
5.Tag Skill system(replace with OB's skill/level system)

EDIT: Now that I think of it I'm removing the Pipboy from that list.
 
The Pipboy is the most expendable part of that list. While it's undeniably a part of the atmosphere of Fallout, it's inherently disposable.

After that, the Isometric viewpoint. Fallout could survive a different camera angle, but it could not survive the removal of options 1 or 3 or the replacement of option 5 and still be intact and recognizable.

However, that's not to say tweaking and improvement (NOT lobotomization like happened to Oblivion) of the tag/skill system would be a bad thing. It is inherently flawed, though not nearly so badly as Oblivion.
 
Remove the Pip-boy option. It's much too unimportant compared to the others, so having it in a "choose one" poll ruins the poll.

For me, it would be in this order: 4, 2, 5, 1, 3. 3 in undeniably the most important feature on your list.
 
I'd have to say the ISO view. But man, without the Iso view, it just wouldn't be Fallout wnow, would it??

The others definitely have to be part of the game.
 
This has got to be the most idiotic thread I've seen around here. What're you trying to do? They'll throw away everything you want or like anyway. Face it, Fallout 3 will have as much in common with Fallouts 1+2 as Ultima IX had with Ultima V. It will be a hi-tech, shiney and soulless creation, the ruin of the entire series.
 
Francis said:
This has got to be the most idiotic thread I've seen around here. What're you trying to do? They'll throw away everything you want or like anyway. Face it, Fallout 3 will have as much in common with Fallouts 1+2 as Ultima IX had with Ultima V. It will be a hi-tech, shiney and soulless creation, the ruin of the entire series.
Click to expand...
Thank you for sharing your opinion with us. :roll:

I think FO3 really needs :
- dialogue trees
- turn-based combat only (no realtime option or whatever, 'cause that'll most probably make combat unbalanced)
- isometric view (but it doesn't need to be a fixed camera, a zoom function would be just great)
- S.P.E.C.I.A.L.
- non-linear story
- the good ol' Fallout setting that we love so much

The tag skill system can not be missed, but it can certainly be ameliorated.
 
Francis said:
This has got to be the most idiotic thread I've seen around here. What're you trying to do? They'll throw away everything you want or like anyway. Face it, Fallout 3 will have as much in common with Fallouts 1+2 as Ultima IX had with Ultima V. It will be a hi-tech, shiney and soulless creation, the ruin of the entire series.
Click to expand...
Stop trolling.

I'd also have to say Isometric View, by the way.
 
Difficult to say. All four points are essential for Fallout. Maybe the Tag Skills, yes, but replaced by Oblivion's skill system? I don't think that would work with the other three given points.
 
Francis said:
This has got to be the most idiotic thread I've seen around here. What're you trying to do? They'll throw away everything you want or like anyway. Face it, Fallout 3 will have as much in common with Fallouts 1+2 as Ultima IX had with Ultima V. It will be a hi-tech, shiney and soulless creation, the ruin of the entire series.
Click to expand...
Wow, it will? And you actually have testicles? AMAZING!!! Seriously though people, Just say what you voted
 
fa2241, don't feed the troll.

I'd say that none of these are dispensable but if I had to choose I'd probably go with what alec said.
 
None of these things, but if I had to sacrifice something, i would sacrifice the developers for some Ancient Gods :roll: .
 
Better that they sacrifice them all (and change its name from Fallout) than Sacrifice one or two and call it Fallout...imo.
 
Likewise, I would sacrifice none. This entire discussion is rather pointless, because a developer who removes either of the elements in question obviously has a poor grasp of Fallout's design and thus isn't likely to get *any* of the remaining elements right (or preserve them at all, for that matter).

However, I'll play along and choose turn-based combat as the only feature removal of which I would tolerate. Planescape: Torment has convinced me that it's possible to have superb roleplaying even with a mediocre combat system. Fallout without TB combat would be like a Delta Force commando without an arm - greatly crippled, but still capable of whooping any non-commando's ass. Plus, I tend to play diplomatic characters, so combat is usually an avoidable nuissance for me.

On the other hand, branching dialogues and SPECIAL system are so essential to Fallout that getting rid of them would be akin to removing the aforementioned commando's brain and replacing it with a Motorola MC-68020 CPU. The commando would be able to breathe, eat, move around awkwardly and run Amiga 1200 games in his mind, but little beyond that. As for the isometric view, my assumption is that change of viewpoint, in addition to drastically altering the overall feel of the game, also implies a change of combat system (there are hardly any turn-based first-person or chase cam games), so it's definitely worse than "just" replacing turn-based combat with a form of real-time.
 
Iso view and turn based are pretty much the most expendable parts here, we need neither to play Fallout. Besides, there's no way Bethesda would buy the rights to a game for more than $1 million just to make an Oblivion Clone. With good branching dialog and SPECIAL it can still be a kickass game, even if it is being made by Beth. (Not like Iso or Turn Based are in Fallout PnP am I right? XD)
 
By the Tag System do you mean S.P.E.C.I.A.L as a whole, or just the tag side? No way I'd want S.P.E.C.I.A.L dropped, but losing Iso might not hurt too much. Still, the less changed the better. Better have a fall from grace that feels like a Fallout game, like FO2, than a fall from grace that only shares a name in common.
 
fa2241 said:
Iso view and turn based are pretty much the most expendable parts here, we need neither to play Fallout.
Click to expand...

I like how you equate your opinion as fact with that. You might not need neither, probably because you seem to not understand the importance to either in Fallout's gameplay. According to history and what people seem to expect from a Fallout game other than "It r havbe teh postal-apocvalyptic", I'd say that you're dead wrong.

Generally, if someone is going to have a thread like this, they will give reasons for their choice. Others did so, and then you post this and take a dive headfirst into Todd's lap as reasoning.

Besides, there's no way Bethesda would buy the rights to a game for more than $1 million just to make an Oblivion Clone.
Click to expand...

If you haven't noticed, Bethesda has taken licenses in the past to take a squat upon them, nevermind what shiny crap they introduct into whatever genre they're piddling into.

With good branching dialog and SPECIAL it can still be a kickass game, even if it is being made by Beth.
Click to expand...

Which means that Bethesda will have to learn how to script branching dialog. SPECIAL could simply be a mangled form of their TES character system, done so to work in real-time combat. Really, you say it could be "a kickass game", even when you obviously haven't even looked at Oblivion to understand that your verbal fellatio is a bit...misplaced.

(Not like Iso or Turn Based are in Fallout PnP am I right? XD)
Click to expand...

You're wrong. Iso is the tabletop representation, and turn-based is part of playing...

...you know, it's simpler and more time saving to just call you stupid. I can understand opinions, but when you use this kind of unbelievable rationalization, you're ready for Todd to make you his bitch. Go to his forums if you're going to suck him and Bethesda off.
 
Roshambo said:
If you haven't noticed, Bethesda has taken licenses in the past to take a squat upon them, nevermind what shiny crap they introduct into whatever genre they're piddling into.
Click to expand...
Ahem, once again I challenge anyone to name a better maker of drag racing games. The prestigious IHRA entrusted Betesda with this task. This is drag racing people - there's a red light, it turns green, you accelerate in a straight line for a few seconds and then slow down. Bethesda's design acumen is nothing short of genius. Let's not even mention the classy things they did with the Pro Bowling Association. Given their track record handling these high-profile licenses, how can anyone have reservations about FO3?
 
Wrong answers. All of you.

The right answer is:

*lifts indexfinger*

You CAN'T sacrifice ANYTHING of the essential things, which made Fallout that what it was... FALLOUT!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top