OXM article excerpts

[UniversalWolf]

Wow. Definitely disagree. If you want to discuss it you should be aware that I'm armed to the teeth with counterexamples, but I have a feeling that we'll ultimately just agree to disagree.

You're really into arguing for its own sake, aren't you?

The way real FO is more immersive than FINO is similar to the way Civilization or Hearts of Iron is more immersive than Halo or Call of Duty (because real Fallout is a completely different kind of game from a shooter, the way Civ and HoI are not CoD). Immersion comes from being able to envision or imagine a reality being presented by the game, not from being shown a highly-flawed attempt at simulating a reality. First-person game are all failed attempts at convincing the player he's actually living in a particular setting. Failed because, among other things, people tend to have peripheral vision and necks that swivel.

You'll know you have a convincing and original counter-argument if I respond again.

 

[Morbus]

I think an important concept to have in mind is that, unlike some (not all, and not even most) first person shooters, RPGs aren't supposed to put the player in a given reality. They are supposed to put the player in charge of the decisions of one or more characters in a give reality. Sometimes people forget that and think that the more "immersed" the better, because "it's like we're there", but hey! It's not *we* that are supposed to be there, that's completely against the genre.

I had a discussion about this a while ago somewhere else, and I really think I'm right. Just like in a stage, for instance, it's not the actor that's up there, it's the character. In a role-playing game it's the character, not the player. Of course, this doesn't mean RPGs shouldn't let the player immerse himself, it means it's not a major point of design. Besides, then we see stupid fuckers thinking RPGs are all about getting inside a reality and acting like if it were us that were there. What a load of crap. Whatever happened to replayability and playing different characters?

 

[Mord_Sith]

The XBox happened, and lo, the ignorites had finally found a medium that they couldn't be noobed off of, so they spread, and frolicked, and danced to their own tune of nails on chalkboards, creating such a cacophony that no decent gamer would go near it.

So the mighty lords of the XBox decided that they should get things for the ignorites to do, so they started throwing money at design companies to make their platform more viable to make games on than a PC, and thus a black wind blew...

 

[ghar]

Exactly what is everyones problem with Feral ghouls by the way?

a rarity, as opposed to another mutated and mindless beast to fill dungeons with.. right? riiight?

Please take note of something we tried to hammer in your heads for the past three, four pages: degenerated, zombie-like ghouls were present in previous Fallouts. And were supposed to be featured as a rarity in Van Buren.

My emphasis added.

The problem that everyone has with the "feral ghouls" is that its a cheap bandwagon tactic to mimick the last six big "zombie" movies released -- the three Resident Evil ones, the two 28 days later ones, and the one "I Am Legend" movie.

And as Bethesda said, they aren't simply "feral", they are "zombie-esque".

"Feral" ghouls are in and zombie-esque

No one would have a problem if they ended with a period after "in" -- or at least, a lot less people would've. Additionally, with all the talk about gore, gore, and more gore -- followed by a mention of zombies in the game, it simply sounds like a post-zombie-apocalypse action game, instead of Fallout. My concerns are echoed in the following as well:

I think the problem lies in that (correct me if I'm wrong) it looks like super mutants are going to be savage ogres (read: orcs) and the only screenshot we've seen of ghouls (only one I've seen, again correct me if i'm wrong) is of a scowling zombie. If that's all they end up being in Fallout 3 (which wouldn't be a surprise given all the crap we've seen so far), that's a horrible bastardization of what was Fallout 1/2 super mutants and ghouls.

Sure, there's been indication on the Fallout wikia that "most" NPCs will be the interaction type, but that's not the official FAQ -- and everyone should know by now that open wiki's can't be trusted for information.

The problem is that things like that, the excessive gore for the sake of having gore, the "dark humor" (ha ha), and similar -- AND the fact that, like Brother None reaffirmed, we are treated like a leper colony by Bethesda, does not help increase confidence in the game.

From what I have seen and heard we have the Bethsoft crew treating the old fans like they're lepers, we have the game with orange supermutants that just look like angry orcs with trash cans attached to their gut to make them look like they might be trying to protect themselves, and a loving and caring BoS.

The fact that Emil, the lead designer, is communicating through Q&A with the fans says otherwise.

Oh yes, because it's not like he's avoiding this place like the plague, not like several of our more prominent members either don't go there or are banned from there, and it's not like he's not actually discussing any game elements, only peripheral matters. Hmmm?

That said, it certainly is a good thing. It only took us 2 years of asking for more fan interaction for the lead designer to bother posting on his own forum.

It's certainly a good thing, but honestly, I'm not all that impressed.

Everyone here wants Fallout 3 to kick ass, but at least half of us are worried that Fallout 3 will pander completely to the Oblivion crowd and have only a passing resemblance in artwork and names to the Fallout franchise we've all grown to know and love.

 

[TorontoReign]

Im sorry Ghar but jumping to the conclusion that Fallout 3 will be a Post-Apocalyptic-Zombie Action game is a bit far fetched. IF they were going to use a enemy repetitively over and over again like in Oblivion it would probably be the Mutant anyway. I doubt the feral ghoul will play the biggest role in the game. {Edit: I was wrong. Feral ghouls were fucking everywhere. Just awful }

To address the issue about Bethesda avoiding NMA... Are you surprised in the least bit? NMA has shunned Bethesda for a long time. NMA isn't the nicest and most welcoming community either. I understand the hardcore fanbase that we hold here, but it seems to me that some people are a bit "too" hardcore. I myself am not in the Isometric/turn-based crowd. I've played that before. It's fine but it never made Fallout for me.

What made Fallout to me was the character uniqueness that you get in every play through. The deep storyline that kept me wanting to learn more and just play a little bit longer when I knew I should quit. The unique dialog tree and the way everything you do effects the people around you. The list goes on. But like I said before the combat wasn't my favorite part (it wasn't bad by any means) and the isometric view doesn't mean shit to me. {Edit: New Vegas would be my prime example. It is one of my favorites in the series and it is FPS. I am open to both. Unfortunately Fallout 3 almost destroyed the series, so by the time New Vegas came along I didn't have any expectations. It's a love/hate thing I think.}

I think Bethesda probably got tired of hearing the same shit over and over again about turn-based and isometric and said "Fuck those guys, we can't win them over."

I really can't blame them. With graphics like Oblivion and Mass Effect have most gamers don't want to look at things from a birds eye view. Bethesda is in the industry because they want fucking money pure and simple. Can you blame them?

Would you make a game Isometric/turn-based if you knew the vast majority of people would say fuck that and buy the next Oblivion clone right next to it, or would you try to broaden the fanbase and still try to keep the game true to its roots while adding new ideas to keep the story interesting?

Now the Fatboy is just fucking retarded. Thats another story. I don't know what they are fucking thinking with that. Everything else I have seen has been ok to me. I might mention though the Fallout name really doesn't make me want to even play the game. Its the fact that it is Post-Apocalyptic RPG, so I realize I am not one of the "hardcore" Fallout fans on this forum, so my opinion might be vastly different than most fans. {I don't adhere to the isometric is always better viewpoint. I think both are good if done right.} If Fallout had a system similar to KotoR or Deus EX I wouldn't mind, so thats my take on that.

In all honestly guys I fucking love this community no matter how anal it can be about certain topics, but I really disagree with a lot of you guys on a few issues. Launch time I will be expecting different things than a lot of you. To be honest my hope was lifted significantly when they released the info on Dogmeat and the pics of the Vault Dweller and him walking in the wastes, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed. Thats just my little two cents worth guys. Let me know what you think.


Edit from the year 2012: In hindsight I meant well. I wanted to give the game a chance, I was let down horribly, but it all worked out in the end - New Vegas was great, Wasteland 2 is reviving the isometric heyday of yore, and NMA is still hated by masses of Bethesda fanboys. Good times. Where will Fallout 4 take us?

 

[Brother None]

To address the issue about Bethesda avoiding NMA. Are you surprised in the least bit? NMA has shunned Bethesda for a pretty long time. NMA can not be the nicest and most welcoming community at times as well.

Bullshit.

We've always welcomed developers who register here and never responded hostilely. We tried to keep up developer relations for the first period of Fallout 3's development, but it was clear Bethesda had no interest in this after the exclusive first showings of the demo. Hell, we had a rule here that forbade people to jump to conclusions about Fallout 3 when little info was known.

We never shunned Bethesda until they made it clear we could fuck off. The whole "NMA started it" line is a blatant lie that keeps getting thrown about without anyone thinking to actually question the assumption. Did you ever think we tried but Bethesda decide they had no need of us, huh?

I think Bethesda probably got tired of hearing the same shit said over and over again about turn-based and isometric view and said "Fuck those guys,we can't win them over."

Oh. Please point me to the period where they actually tried winning us over, or shut the fuck up.

 

[DarkCorp]

What made Fallout to me was the character uniqueness that you get in every play through. The deep storyline that kept me wanting to learn more and just play a little bit longer when I knew I should quit. The unique dialog tree and the way everything you do effects the people around you. The list goes on. But like I said before the combat wasn't my favorite part (it wasn't bad by any means) and the isometric view doesn't mean shit to me.

Everything that you just said you liked about Fallout is non-existant in oblivion and morrowind. Now keep in mind that Todd himself said F3 will feel very much like Oblivion. Hmm, sounds more like oblivion with guns to me then anything else atm.

Bethesda is in the industry because they like games and they want fucking money pure and simple. Can you blame them. Would you make a game Isometric/turn-based if you knew the vast majority of people would say fuck that and buy the next Oblivion clone right next to it,or would you try to broaden the fanbase and still try to keep the game true to its roots while adding new ideas to keep the story interesting?

Couple of things.

1. Making radical changes like turning a mechanic heavy rpg system into some kinda shooter deus ex wannabe isn't "true to the roots"

2. Both F2 and Van Buren incorporated new story elements and did well without being subjected to an overhaul from hell.(well VB wasn't released but if it had been I am sure it would have done a lot better than FBOS)

3. Whos to say its going to be successful? Remember its been pointed out time and time again. The Fallouts that were "gimmicked" did poorly. Scratch that, Tactics was mildly successful while FBOS tanked.

4. Broaden the fanbase? Catering to Oblivionites is not an example of broadening the fanbase. Making just another shooter in a world of shooters isn't going to broaden the fanbase. If anything, making F3 closer to its predecessor would introduce a whole new generation of gamers to a cult classic with a slight touchup in the graphics department.

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

Wow, I haven't seen you often like this Brother None.

Often you're a voice of reason while the rest of us are tearing the board apart.

 

[Simeon]

I like angry brother none better.
fire and brimstone <3

 

[Slaughter Manslaught]

I like angry brother none better.
fire and brimstone <3

Indeed! The man can control himself, but when he gets his "angry Fallout Fan" thing going for him, hold on, it's war!

 

[TorontoReign]

To address the issue about Bethesda avoiding NMA. Are you surprised in the least bit? NMA has shunned Bethesda for a pretty long time. NMA can not be the nicest and most welcoming community at times as well.

Bullshit.

We've always welcomed developers who register here and never responded hostilely. We tried to keep up developer relations for the first period of Fallout 3's development, but it was clear Bethesda had no interest in this after the exclusive first showings of the demo. Hell, we had a rule here that forbade people to jump to conclusions about Fallout 3 when little info was known.

We never shunned Bethesda until they made it clear we could fuck off. The whole "NMA started it" line is a blatant lie that keeps getting thrown about without anyone thinking to actually question the assumption. Did you ever think we tried but Bethesda decide they had no need of us, huh?

I think Bethesda probably got tired of hearing the same shit said over and over again about turn-based and isometric view and said "Fuck those guys,we can't win them over."

Oh. Please point me to the period where they actually tried winning us over, or shut the fuck up.

Seriously Brother. Shut the Fuck up? For someone to get so angry over a trivial issue is fucking ridiculous. I merely stated my opinion and did not try at all in the topic to persuade or dissuade anyone , and never spoke bad about anyone. Was shut the fuck up really necessary? If I said something that was wrong you could have just said " No thats not right here is why" instead of resorting to childishness.

They are attempting to make a sequel to a series we all like. They are fans supposedly just like us. They added fucking Dogmeat at least WTF? I think they are trying.

They don't have to win NMA over to begin with anyway. I don't think they tried to alienate NMA until it was obvious that everyone's minds were already made. Like I said before this is my opinion.
If I am out of line say something, but if a shut the fuck up is all I will receive then what is the point of having a forum? Differing viewpoints is kinda part of a forum right? They have been trying to keep the game as true to Fallout as possible or so they say. They are not going to please every single fan obviously, so they chose a couple of elements that displeased many here at NMA and other places as well. That is not only a design choice that will show Fallout like we have never seen it before, but a good marketing decision as well.

Maybe they shouldn't have taken the Fallout license.
Maybe they are butchering certain aspects of the canon.
Maybe they should have just made it a PA RPG with no ties to Fallout at all.

I never disputed that. I think Bethesda tried to please everyone and that is the problem some fans are having. There are more people out there that play Bethesda games than there are actively posting in this Forum, so they had to choose certain things that they liked and disliked from Fallout and modify it.

If it was the right decision or not is open to debate obviously, but I really think that they are doing there best to keep the Fallout series intact and successful. To be perfectly honest the game has had very little info released. How can we judge a game before it has even came out? It is months from release and may be delayed like Oblivion was.

What made Fallout to me was the character uniqueness that you get in every play through. The deep storyline that kept me wanting to learn more and just play a little bit longer when I knew I should quit. The unique dialog tree and the way everything you do effects the people around you. The list goes on. But like I said before the combat wasn't my favorite part (it wasn't bad by any means) and the isometric view doesn't mean shit to me.

Everything that you just said you liked about Fallout is non-existent in oblivion and morrowind. Now keep in mind that Todd himself said F3 will feel very much like Oblivion. Hmm, sounds more like oblivion with guns to me then anything else atm.

Non-existent? Well I disagree with that. Each time I have played Morrowind or Oblivion with a different character I have gotten a different experience. I liked the dialogue options for the most part as well. Morrowind reminded me of Shadowrun, but Oblivion was not quite as good. I am hoping that Fallout 3 will change that. I admit I like Morrowind better because I disliked the fast travel and compass in Oblivion as well as the auto-scaled enemies. Still doesn't change the fact that Oblivion was fun.
Oblivion with guns huh? I will admit I dislike Todd very much. He hasn't promoted the game very well in my opinion. All I keep hearing is lots of blood, like Oblivion, and freedom of exploration. That is said about lots of games nowadays, but the specifics have not been released , ie:
How many locations there are.
How many NPC's there are.
Projected time it will take to finish the game.
Number of missions and sidequests.

Todd in his all knowing wisdom said the game was like Oblivion with guns to explain the game in few words or so he said. Maybe hes a fucking idiot for doing that, but he also made lots of people who like Oblivion pay attention to a game they might not have if the title wasn't attached to it. Me personally...I don't give a fuck. I liked Oblivion for a short amount of time until I moved to another game. If Fallout 3 is a Oblivion clone I will play the fuck out of it until the game gets boring. I see me playing it for longer than normal merely because it is PA, Fallout, and a RPG. Thats what I am looking for in a game right now.

Bethesda is in the industry because they like games and they want fucking money pure and simple. Can you blame them. Would you make a game Isometric/turn-based if you knew the vast majority of people would say fuck that and buy the next Oblivion clone right next to it,or would you try to broaden the fanbase and still try to keep the game true to its roots while adding new ideas to keep the story interesting?

Couple of things.

1. Making radical changes like turning a mechanic heavy rpg system into some kinda shooter deus ex wannabe isn't "true to the roots"

2. Both F2 and Van Buren incorporated new story elements and did well without being subjected to an overhaul from hell.(well VB wasn't released but if it had been I am sure it would have done a lot better than FBOS)

3. Whos to say its going to be successful? Remember its been pointed out time and time again. The Fallouts that were "gimmicked" did poorly. Scratch that, Tactics was mildly successful while FBOS tanked.

4. Broaden the fanbase? Catering to Oblivionites is not an example of broadening the fanbase. Making just another shooter in a world of shooters isn't going to broaden the fanbase. If anything, making F3 closer to its predecessor would introduce a whole new generation of gamers to a cult classic with a slight touchup in the graphics department.

In response to your comments Darkcorp.

1. Just by changing the combat doesn't mean it changes the roots in my opinion. I guess roots can be loosely interpreted, most everything is the same like the Vaults,Mutants,apocalypse,etc....minus some minor changes which we don't even know specifics of like the Brotherhood splitting off and feral ghouls and Mutant appearance. The Fatman is the glaring issue,but I will wait and see what happens with that one. Combat wise I don't think is a problem. Deus Ex rocked in my opinion. According to what Bethesda has saidn stats will matter when using the VAT system. I am going to trust their word for now on that. I don't think that the combat and viewpoint defines the game though.

2. I don't mind the overhaul. Fallout 2 was actually a lot different than Fallout 1 story wise yet most like it. New Reno is one big example. Is that UnFallouty? What about some of the weapon choices? UnFallouty you say? Everyone considers it canon. Why is it that we can choose what is canon? {Only later did I learn of the great divide that Fallout 2 caused in this very community. Another touchy topic}

3. Tactics being gimmicky? I don't know about that. They changed the mechanics of the game and people didn't like it. It happens. FBOS was a POS of course, but I wouldn't consider it a gimmick. Just stupid and boring. It was a bad game in all aspects.

4. Oblivion sold a lot of fucking games last I checked. If selling more copies than any other game is not expanding the fan base then I don't know what is. More people will play Fallout 3 if it is designed like Oblivion than if it was designed like the previous titles. You have to admit that. Saying that Fallout 3 is just going to be another shooter is crazy. Even if Fallout 3 was just a shooter and had no RPG aspects to it, I would like it better than any Halo, Call of Duty, or Halflife.

If it is just the 3 that bothers people like some people say (complaining about it not being a true sequel, but being ok if it wasn't considered a continuation) then take the fucking three off in your head. Imagine some catchy title in place of the 3. Imagine that a "true" sequel is going to be made one day and that everything will be fine and dandy. { New Vegas should probably hold that tile}Or maybe one of these ambitious mods will be completed one day and Fallout fans can play a isometric Fallout with a turn-based combat style. Until then I will be anxiously awaiting Fallout 3 and hoping it is fun. {It was fun for a while, then utterly depressing on a traumatizing scale.}

 

[shihonage]

If I buy the Tetris license, make it into a side-scrolling Contra clone, and make the enemies into L-shaped blocks, does that win me points with Tetris fans ?

Yes - if they're fucking retarded.

Same goes for naming a dog after a dead dog in the prequels. Gimmicky, superficial, and stupid.

 

[DarkCorp]

1. I am not talking just combat once again. Fallout 1 and 2 was heavily based on pnp mechanics. The dialogue and story complexity was amazing and nothing else had come close to it. Daggerfall, Morrowind and Oblivion are nothing like what Fallout 1 and 2 were. Heck, even Deus Ex was something unique and nothing like Fallout 1 and 2.

2. There is a big difference between new ideas and changing the way the game was played entirely. F2 and VB still used rpg heavy mechanics to run their game. Tetris to Dr. Mario I understand. What I don't understand is if Tetris 2 was a real time strategy game using the shapes as buildings and units.

3. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gimmick When I use gimmick I mean IPLAYS retarded attempt in butchering an established franchise into something else hoping to attract new business. Beth is also vivisecting Fallout into another frankenstein machine in hopes of attracting the first person shooter fanbase and raking in the cash.

4. I refuse to believe that F3 being "oblivionated" will sell more than if it was produced more closely to its predecessors. I mean look at the market. How many shooters are out there? How many "super shiny graffix" games are on the market? Now you tell me how many games are out that were like the original Fallouts and Arcanum?

The reason why I believe the TES line sold so well along with oblivion and morrowind was because it was bethesdas unique baby. No game had tried to balance medieval swords and sorcery with rpg elements into such a huge world.

I think a lot of people mistake our disgust with mutating fallout into oblivion with a general disgust with bethesdas games. I for one enjoyed Daggerfall and Morrowind. I just want a faithful sequel to Fallout though and what beth is doing is not faithful to the original games.

Now beth is trying to turn something that was completely unique into a "game for the masses" which I believe is dangerous and foolish. I still say the majority of FPS fans will continue to play games like Quake Wars, Crysis, Battlefield 2041/modern combat, etc.

 

[Sander]

If I am out of line say something, but if a shut the fuck up is all I will receive then what is the point of having a forum? Differing viewpoints is kinda part of a forum right? They have been trying to keep the game as true to Fallout as possible or so they say. They are not going to please every single fan obviously,so they chose a couple of elements that displeased many here at NMA and other places as well. That is not only a design choice that will show Fallout like we have never seen it before,but a good marketing decision as well.

Ah yes, the tired old 'They can't please everyone' rhetoric.
Here's a hint for you, we've pretty much objectively defined Fallout's core design. Yet Bethesda purposely ignores pretty much all of Fallout's core design in favour of their own cooler design that may sell more, but has nothing to do with being true to the series.

Of course they're going to say that they're keeping as close to the original as possible. That's called a marketing trick, and is obviously bullshit because they've ignored the biggest Fallout fansite from the very beginning. Yes, before everyones minds were set. Hell, we had a more or less official 'Let's just wait and see what happens' attitude for over a year, and guess what: they didn't listen to us then either.

And you haven't answered Brother None's question yet: point to the place in time where Bethesda 'realised' that everyone's minds were set and the difference with the attitude they took before that.

Your arguments are tired and fallacious, and show that you fail to do even the tiniest bit of research before spouting off some nonsense on these boards.

Oblivion sold a lot of fucking games last I checked. If selling more copies than any other game is not expanding the fan base then I don't know what is. More people will play Fallout 3 if it is designed like Oblivion than if it was designed like the previous titles. You have to admit that.

That's a neat little justification there, "it'll sell more so now you should like it".
Really, what the fuck? I don't care if it'll sell more or reach more people, I care whether or not it does any justice to the Fallout name.

Saying that Fallout 3 is just going to be another shooter is crazy. Even if Fallout 3 was just a shooter and had no RPG aspects to it I would like it better than any Halo, Call of Duty, or Halflife.
If it is just the 3 that bothers people like some people say (complaining about it not being a true sequel, but being ok if it wasn't considered a continuation) then take the fucking three off in your head. Imagine some catchy title in place of the 3. Imagine that a "true" sequel is going to be made one day and that everything will be fine and dandy. Or maybe one of these ambitious mods will be completed one day and Fallout fans can play a isometric Fallout with a turn-based combat style. Until then I personally will be anxiously awaiting Fallout 3 and hoping it is fun.

Ah yes, 'just imagine it's okay'.
Again, what the fuck? The whole point is that it *is* a sequel, and as a sequel it determines the future of the franchise. Essentially what we're seeing is that the series disappears and turns into yet another generic next-gen 'role-playing game'.

We're a Fallout fansite. We hence want a game similar to Fallout. You can whine all you want about that, but bullshit arguments amounting to 'more people will like that' won't change a thing about that.

 

[Brother None]

Seriously Brother. Shut the Fuck up? For someone to get so angry over a trivial issue is fucking ridiculous. I merely stated my opinion and did not try at all in the topic to persuade or dissuade anyone ,and never spoke bad about anyone. Was shut the fuck up really necessary? If I said something that was wrong you could have just said " No thats not right here is why" instead of resorting to childishness.

Stop being a pussy. This is no place for pussies.

They are fans supposedly just like us.

Fans of what? The game or the game's setting?

They don't have to win NMA over to begin with anyway.

I never said they did.

I don't think they tried to alienate NMA until it was obvious that everyone fucking minds were already made. Like I said before this is my opinion.

Yeah. I'm sorry but this is not the book-of-the-month club. We prefer our opinions staved by facts. If we all just start spouting our opinions without any arguments or facts presented, we might as well move NMA to 4chan and just spam away.

If I am out of line say something, but if a shut the fuck up is all I will receive then what is the point of having a forum? Differing viewpoints is kinda part of a forum right? They have been trying to keep the game as true to Fallout as possible or so they say. They are not going to please every single fan obviously,so they chose a couple of elements that displeased many here at NMA and other places as well. That is not only a design choice that will show Fallout like we have never seen it before,but a good marketing decision as well.
(...)
I never disputed that. I think Bethesda tried to please everyone and that is the problem some fans are having. There are more people out there that play Bethesda games than there are actively posting in this Forum, so they had to choose certain things that they liked and disliked from Fallout and modify it.
If it was the right decision or not is open to debate obviously, but I really think that they are doing there best to keep the Fallout series intact and successful. To be perfectly honest the game has had very little info released. How can we judge a game before it has even came out? It is months from release and may be delayed like Oblivion was.

All this has absolutely zero to do with their treatment of NMA, so this is irrelevant as it is not what we were discussing.

Imagine some catchy title in place of the 3

The ultimate answer to any Bethesda product. "Just imagine it's actually good".

Would you make a game Isometric/turn-based if you knew the vast majority of people would say fuck that and buy the next Oblivion clone right next to it,or would you try to broaden the fanbase and still try to keep the game true to its roots while adding new ideas to keep the story interesting?

Please distinguish "broadening the fanbase" from abandoning one fanbase for another. They are distinct.

 

[TorontoReign]

Sander and Brother you are absolutely right. I posted without properly researching the topic. I did not research heavily enough to make a argument for Bethesda's half. I did say shit that was not backed up in any way. I'm not going to use the excuse that I "didn't have time to research" or anything like that. Your right that this shit has been said a thousand times before and I should not
waste my time and everyone else's time saying it because the logic is flawed. I won't post on their half again because I understand what you are saying about the "core mechanics" being changed in some ways I suppose. I did not intend to justify the shift to a Oblivion style RPG though. My intention was to say that I "understand" why they would do it from a business perspective and it doesn't bother me personally.

I guess when it really boils down to it I just want Fallout 3 to be the best game ever and I make my self side with Bethesda even though some things they do might be wrong for the series. I make no excuses and I do understand why you are angry about Bethesda's development on the game, however I do not agree with people saying it is being dumbed down. I think Morrowind was a pretty fucking deep game. Like I said before Oblivion was dumbed down a bit and it pissed me off. I hope Fallout 3 isn't like that, but I will give the developers a chance to release some decent information before saying that the game is a Deus Ex wannabe and not as complex as previous games in the series. Even though I wouldn't care if Fallout 3 was turned into a Deus Ex hybrid I would rather it be a true RPG.

You are right they are abandoning one fanbase for another. I do understand that they are marketing the game away from the NMA crowd though. I guess I worded it wrong. I understand that they are doing that. I just don't care. I really don't care enough about anything to get pissed off. If my post sounded whiny that was not the intention Sander. I don't think it sounds whiny though. I suppose you could look at Bethesdas marketing scheme as gimmicky when you say they are trying to bring in the FPS crowd. In the future I will make sure that I research the topic more closely and won't post purely opinionated topics on issues such as this.

But I'm not a pussy.

 

[Atomic Cowboy]

In a role-playing game it's the character, not the player. Of course, this doesn't mean RPGs shouldn't let the player immerse himself, it means it's not a major point of design. Besides, then we see stupid fuckers thinking RPGs are all about getting inside a reality and acting like if it were us that were there. What a load of crap. Whatever happened to replayability and playing different characters?

You're completely right. You're creating a character, not immersing yourself. Otherwise, what's the point of have an 'Evil' character path availabe? For the population of evil people out there, who buy the game?

Immersion is what happens in Half Life - where you really feel like are are Dr. Freeman, trying to escape a facility and piece together what happened. Role Playing is about creating an interesting story with interesting characters. Anyone who's played a PnP game knows this. You don't win a PnP game; you have a good story.

The subtler implications of that, far more than the combat mechanics themselves, are what made Fallout such a great game.

 

[Morbus]

It's all about design though. In my eyes, it's perfectly possible to have a true RPG in a first person game... It's not easy, and it's certainly not possible at all using First Person Shooters' mechanics (which is what Bethesda's doing) but it's possible... I think

 

[Mord_Sith]

Isn't that what those old DnD games for the Nes and Dos used to do, when you came across an ugly you saw it pretty much take up the corridor and you had a battle menu pop up

 

[Brother None]

Realms of Arkania is mostly first-person. First person for exploring and dialogue, isometric for combat, map view for travelling.

Realms of Arkania II is also a better game than Fallout. Greatest RPG of all time. First-person.

TR: 's cool.

My intention was to say that I "understand" why they would do it from a business perspective and it doesn't bother me personally.

I think we all know why they're making the kind of game they're making from a business perspective.

What some of us are scratching our heads about are why they bought the Fallout license just to turn it into a commercial product. Doesn't seem that smart, to me.

But their business-interest has never been in question. They make profitable games, it's what they do. BUT! I've never invested any primacy in the question "is this company making money?" and neither should you. As a consumer, that should be a secondary concern to your own (vested) interest in the product. This is true for anything, from a bottle of coca cola to a car.

I do understand that they are marketing the game away from the NMA crowd though. I guess I worded it wrong. I understand that they are doing that. I just don't care. I really don't care enough about anything to get pissed off.

That's fine. This is friggin' Tibet, there's no reason for anyone else to care. I mean, we get treated like shit a lot but we never expected any handouts. We're fine with other people not caring, why should they? It's not your problem, so don't worry about it.

But on the other hand, if you don't care at all, there's no real reason to bother us with your non-caring, either.

But I'm not a pussy.

Prove it. I'll fight you.