Rosh talks about Bethesda

[Ennui]

Also, CRPGs classically don't rely on the skill of the player in combat. How good the figure does in combat, in conversation etc. depends on his stats, and his stats depend on how good the player is. You're confusing CRPGs with games like Diablo and Morrowind.

You sure? Play any PC RPG and there is a vast variation on how good the char does in combat. The player decides what skills/spells to use when, weather to buff himself (or chem etc in the case of FO) before combat, what to equip themselves with.

A bad player of FO might not aim with their gun because they dont think it will have any effect, a good player knows it has an effect and uses it accordingly. ALL rpgs rely on the skill of the player to know how best to use his charecter. Once you start taking choice away from the player you get blandness.

And the mmorpg comment was just to illustrate how badly RPG systems can go that way.

 

[Sander]

You sure? Play any PC RPG and there is a vast variation on how good the char does in combat. The player decides what skills/spells to use when, weather to buff himself (or chem etc in the case of FO) before combat, what to equip themselves with.

A bad player of FO might not aim with their gun because they dont think it will have any effect, a good player knows it has an effect and uses it accordingly. ALL rpgs rely on the skill of the player to know how best to use his charecter. Once you start taking choice away from the player you get blandness.

And the mmorpg comment was just to illustrate how badly RPG systems can go that way.

Goddamnit, man, how hard is this to understand?
The player decides what the character must do, otherwise you might as well go watch an interactive movie or read a book, BUT HOW WELL the character PERFORMS these actions relies on the skill the CHARACTER has, not on the players skill. This is vastly different from shooters, and this is even different from Morrowind, where, due to the real-time system, you need to be alert, you need to react, this has nothing to do with the skills of the player.

 

[Ennui]

Now you're mouth-stuffing, too, when I've made my views painfully clear and at length as to what would be likely if certain things were and were not kept. It is my intent to steer Bethesda into paying attention to what kills game series off, which is changing the formula without real cause. The fans didn't buy a sequel to receive a spin-off.

Instead, you've painted up this cariacature of me and what I mean and that is now your basis upon reality. I'm sorry, kid, but go play the victim elsewhere. I'm not going to entertain more of your juvenile prattle and ignorant wasting of bandwidth that is doing nothing but derailing the thread and proving that you are arude little newbie shit and didn't bother to observe basic netiquette either.

Yes you have made your views perfectly clear, you call anyone who disagrees with you idiots, claim they know nothing, and dont refute anything they say with facts. Saying 'You know nothing about -blah-' without backing it up means bugger all.

And who are you to lecture on basic netiqutte? You have yet to show any.

 

[Sander]

Yes you have made your views perfectly clear, you call anyone who disagrees with you idiots, claim they know nothing, and dont refute anything they say with facts. Saying 'You know nothing about -blah-' without backing it up means bugger all.

Methinks the claims "You need to fight in Fallout", "RPGS are about fighting" "SPECIAL is bad because the combat is unbalanced" "Fallout wasn't built around SPECIAL" "Making a new system instead of sticking with a good one is good" "Bethesda are going to do {insert something}" all exhibit a fair amount of not knowing anything, because each and every one of those is proveably false, except for the last one, in which case you'd have to be a Bethesda developer to see whether they're going to do this or that.
And sicne Bethesda developers claimed that they would listen to fans, I highly doubt they're going to throw out SPECIAL.

And who are you to lecture on basic netiqutte? You have yet to show any.

That's not true. Rosh is abusive, but he has every right to be. You're just a newbie here and you storm right into a discussion talking about things you clearly don't know well enough.

 

[Roshambo]

Yes you have made your views perfectly clear, you call anyone who disagrees with you idiots, claim they know nothing, and dont refute anything they say with facts. Saying 'You know nothing about -blah-' without backing it up means bugger all.

You're right. I do that to the ignorant and mouth-stuffing morons like yourself that think you can seriously bullshit your way through this discussion.

And who are you to lecture on basic netiqutte? You have yet to show any.

Sorry? Flaming two complete idiots, both of which enjoy mouth-stuffing and posting wave after wave of ignorant drivel isn't against netiquette. A basic aspect of netiquette is lurking, which you haven't bothered to do, else you'd understand how badly you have your head up your ass. Maybe if you had some clue about Fallout's design then you'd be taken halfway seriously.

As it stands, other people have called your game of posting ignorant crap and whether it is honestly ignorant or flamebait, it has no place on this forum. Educate yourself before you rape your keyboard again.

 

[Brother None]

You sure? Play any PC RPG and there is a vast variation on how good the char does in combat. The player decides what skills/spells to use when, weather to buff himself (or chem etc in the case of FO) before combat, what to equip themselves with.

A bad player of FO might not aim with their gun because they dont think it will have any effect, a good player knows it has an effect and uses it accordingly. ALL rpgs rely on the skill of the player to know how best to use his charecter. Once you start taking choice away from the player you get blandness..

Yes. I'm sure. That's why Fallout has to be TB and using SPECIAL. This means the player can make tactical decisions, like aiming or not aiming, hiding somewhere or not hiding, but that skills of his character doesn't depend on those decisions. How fast he reacts doesn't even depend on the player, it depends on the character (initiative roll).

That's why Fallout is often referred to as "what CRPGs should be like". It understood and implemented the ideas behind table-top RPGs very well

it has nothing to do with choice, tho'. The thing is the player's decisions depend on him, but the character's skill depends on the character. That's exactly a CRPG is

 

[jr.]

...

you don't know anything about Fallout, SPECIAL, game design, what Bethesda might be doing, frankly lying to support your factless argument, and doing it all inspite of this being pointed out to you. what the hell kind of purpose do you have, here? why are you posting? do you think this's Interplay's website? why are people exactly like you showing up?

 

[Odin]

what the hell kind of purpose do you have, here? why are you posting?

It's called baiting...

 

[Briosafreak]

He even said Silent storm isn`t isometric on Penny Arcade , and doesn`t know what turn-based combat is, and what is the effects of SPECIAL on Fallout

They are all together, the guys doing the stupid comments, thinking they are cool flamebaiting on NMA , while saying stupidity after stupidity to people that has played the Fallout games for 6 years, or playing games before they were born, like me, Odin or Rosh, and quite happy doing it

How dumb one can be is always amazing, you got to love the internet

 

[MadDog]

Hey guys... the Press Release over at Beth seems nice...


http://www.bethsoft.com/news/pressrelease_071204.htm

“We are overjoyed,” said Howard. “Fallout is one of my favorite games, and we plan to develop a visually stunning and original game for Fallout 3 with all the hallmarks of a great RPG: player choice, engaging story, and non-linearity.”

They might actually make a great game... we'll just have to watch and see.

 

[Odin]

-]Hey guys... the Press Release over at Beth seems nice...

They might actually make a great game... we'll just have to watch and see.

Words are one thing, action is another..

 

[MadDog]

All I'm saying is that maybe we should sit back and see what happens. We've got a while before this game actually hits the light, especially since they just got the licenses.

 

[MrMarcus]

Actually, I think we're doing the right thing Mad Dog - making sure Bethesda knows we're aware of what's going on and are not afraid to express ourselves in praise or outrage depending on what the company decides to put forth.

 

[PsychoSniper]

Currently, we only have their intentions for the game to go upon.

Based upon said intentions, they will

A: Use special in some form
B: Remake the game in a method that fits them better

Everytjing else pretty much is 'Too Specific'

 

[Darque]

No, they've been specific in one way

"It's not what they do well"

 

[rikus]

damn baiters, i don't know what it means, but it sure sounds like a waste of space and good intentions.
anyone who played fallouts at least 3 times could NOT have a bad word against it-and that's it. the fucking retards are (baiters) aren't saying jack and just destroying the purpose of this thread, which i think, was a protest against the calmness and the assurence bethdudes had regarding thier newest project, and also thier disregarding some of the most aspects of the game which was said, and -I- will say again why isometric is much better than 1st or 3rdin my opnion!!!!!)

a- no party control, how can u control a party if your view is restricted to forward only?did anyone played a party with 1st person at all?oh right, might and magic 8, watch those eye of the beholder games!!!btw, even troika realized the potential of isometric in TOEE(temple of kaka shit), even though its one of the crappiest shit i've played.

b-wider view of the envoirment.

c-a true fallout feel, you cannot get back to the feeling of fallout if its whole new engine based on a diffrent perspective, unless you have the imagination of another existance which experiences 3 dimensions as two or one, just like morons.

d-lets aim! turn the whole damn screen to search for the enemey, then try to pin point him because he just beyond a wall of enemies!oh sweet needle in the hay stack...

e-even companies which tastes the market's desires, like blizzard, knew they couldn't hurt thier fans too much- by limiting the top down isometric warcraft3.

f-if you still cannot understand, please play fallout again, then play morrowind, then play fallout again, and if you still can't understand get out of here.

please, i am sure that someone with more patiance and competance than me would make a better thread to sum some of this stuff up, so that we won't have that after taste from the fucking baiters.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

You sure? Play any PC RPG and there is a vast variation on how good the char does in combat. The player decides what skills/spells to use when, weather to buff himself (or chem etc in the case of FO) before combat, what to equip themselves with.

You mean "Play most any CRPG". Fallout did allow you to win the game just on speech and charm alone. Sure, most people will play combat characters in Fallout, but that's because of basically what you said. Nearly all CRPGs involve combat. Many players are actually used to having combat being just around every dark corner. In fact, Fallout is the only CRPG I can think of where combat is part of the game but also completely optional. Well, you can do that in Temple of Elemental Evil as well, but it requires a rogue with a lot of stealth.

A bad player of FO might not aim with their gun because they dont think it will have any effect, a good player knows it has an effect and uses it accordingly.

I prefer Fast Shot to aiming, typically. Then again, using the One Hander trait and aiming at the eyes of someone with a pistol from across the map is nice as well.

A good player knows what kind of character he wants to play and what combination of things it takes him to get that special build, pardon the pun. That's just something I liked about Fallout. If you wanted to play a pistol packing gambler, you could do that and win the game effectively as such. If you wanted to play a smooth talking person who backs up what he says with a 12 pound hammer, you can.

ALL rpgs rely on the skill of the player to know how best to use his charecter. Once you start taking choice away from the player you get blandness.

Back on the subject of CRPGs and combat, this is one thing I have a problem with Bethesda doing the game. Bethesda has never done a CRPG where combat wasn't the major focus of the thing. Sure, they can write quests involving killing bandits or dealing with a tomb filled with undead that must be slain, but can they do quests that have multiple methods of doing them? Troika can. Obsidian can to a lesser extent. BioWare's making strides towards this. But can Bethesda?

 

[Roshambo]

“We are overjoyed,” said Howard. “Fallout is one of my favorite games, and we plan to develop a visually stunning and original game for Fallout 3[/b] with all the hallmarks of a great RPG: player choice, engaging story, and non-linearity.”

Well, did this send up GIANT RED WARNING FLAGS for anyone else?

Does it strike anyone else that what this man has just said screams out "clueless" as to what is expected of the Fallout CRPG. Morrowind follows the same descriptions, depending upon how you look at it and how much hype they toss around. Yes, it dounds JUST like the Morrowind pre-release hype.

First they need to prove that they can develop a P&P RPG in the first place, and judging from this, it doesn't look like it is going to happen.

This is even more disturbing:

“We’re extremely excited about this opportunity and what it means both for Bethesda and for Fallout fans around the world,” said Vlatko Andonov, president of Bethesda Softworks. “Fallout is one the great RPG franchises. Millions of Fallout games have been sold worldwide, and fans have been eagerly awaiting the release of a Fallout 3 title. Bethesda’s proven expertise in this genre, building on our experience and the tremendous success we have enjoyed with our cutting-edge Elder Scrolls® series, will enable us to create the next chapter of Fallout that is worthy of the franchise.”

Fallout 3 will be developed by Bethesda along with the next chapter of The Elder Scrolls, both under the direction of Todd Howard, executive producer of The Elder Scrolls.

Seriously, for shamelessly using the "RPG is anything with stats and um...some other stuff" definition of the CRPG genre, Vlatko Andonov loses more than a few points of credibility. Fallout and TES are in wholly different sub-genres it is obvious to anyone who has played both. From the above and with how development usually happens with someone working on two projects at the same time - you can bet that they will be similar in many regards. It's funny that they mention experience, when their previous games have little to no resemblence of what made Fallout good. If they were looking to try and get into computer P&P RPG development, they picked a really inappropriate title to start with.

Commenting on this development, Interplay Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Herve Caen said, “This is a good agreement for both companies and for gamers. Although several parties had a high level of interest in licensing Fallout, we are most impressed by Bethesda’s execution of role-playing titles. Bethesda is an ideal steward of the Fallout franchise.”

Bullshit. They just offered you more money. You'd be slobbering on anyone's knob who gave Interplay money at this point, Herve.

 

[MadDog]

I dunno if that's really the best idea. I mean, constructive criticism after seeing something is one thing, but blasting a company when they have just shown smiles is something else. A lot of people say that NMA is shit and blah blah, we are elitest, and we have no significant mark on sales, yet we think we do.

The problem is, so many people seem to know us, and people either fight us, or believe us. But all in all, changing so many people's opinions of the game before we even see it... doesn't seem like a good deal. Yes, we do have a history of failed games... but there are some sequels/developements that changed hands and people sung praises when they got to the shelves. Don't ask me for examples, because I don't remember...

 

[Darque]

-]I dunno if that's really the best idea. I mean, constructive criticism after seeing something is one thing, but blasting a company when they have just shown smiles is something else.

Doesn't it make sense to judge a company on it's previous releases though?

If say... Blizzard got the licence... what kind of game would you instantly expect from them based on their previous games?

An RTS or a Diablo-clone?