Suggestion thoughts now that you've seen the engine.

PhredBean

Where'd That 6th Toe Come From?
How I see it, it's already been stated that Fallout 3 will use the Oblivion engine by Pete "y'know" Hines, so we're royally screwed UNLESS some major changes are made to it.

Changes such as:

Click-move interface - No fucking W A S D bullshit. I want usage icons, click to move, maybe even some of the stances from Tactics (Tactics sucked, but the combat mechanics had some good solid ideas in it).

Fix the goddamn 3rd person camera - it sucks. Choppy, prone to interference by terrain, choppy, makes distances hard to judge, choppy... you get the point. Fallout 3 should be isometric, end of fucking story. In order to lock the camera in a 3rd-person isometric mode, it'd require alot of work, it would need the ability to cut away ceilings as needed to keep the view without jacking up the camera.

Special system - correct me if I'm wrong, but it was stated that they have every intention of using the SPECIAL system for Fallout3. DON'T MESS WITH IT TO FIT YOUR ENGINE, make the engine fit the system. If they use the special system correctly (they way it was used in fallout 1-2), we won't have to deal with moronic leveling systems that involve bunny-hopping everywhere for acrobatics skill points or standing there while a rat pummels us to level our armor skills.

Skill rolls - Like above, use the special system as intended. No Click-hold to power attack, click-hold + direction to change attack types. Granted I felt that gameplay was rather fun for Oblivion since I was expecting a Action-RPG made for a modern PC/Xbox crowd and not a true cRPG, I wasn't dissappointed in the least and actually enjoyed the gameplay to an extent as it was, but that kind of gameplay has NO place in Fallout.

FaceGen - reduce some of the modifiable values to be more likely to randomize an average appearance. Some values (such as forehead slope,which can give your character a rather simian/bushlike appearanc, and face width go way out of the standard range of human appearance and extreme high or low values on various parts of the face create instantly hideous looks like the kind experienced in Oblivion. That is, if the FaceGen engine is used at all. I would far rather see traditional handmade facial models be used in the game. Though I admit FaceGen is a rather remarkable technology and it's lipsynching/facial expression abilities would fit quite well in making Fallout's Talking Heads for dialog, that is, if they put effort into making the face with it rather than just hitting the random button for making NPCs like I swear they did for Oblivion.

Quests - more quests, more thought put into quests, more moral decisions in quests, more options to solve said quests... more is good here.

Dialog & Scripting - Hire some damn writers, please. They still haven't made any real change from the encyclopedic feel of the dialog, far cry from your statements of "oh, we'd learned from that mistake in Morrowind and won't make it again".

Immersion - requires more than shiny graphics, the entire FEEL of the game goes there. Oblivion's world was too clean, too stylized even for a fantasy game. My armor is too clean after fights, after being stripped off a bandit I mutilated, even the dungeons felt too fake. This is why I find the immersion claims of Oblivion to be false and why enjoyment of the game quickly falls off unless modded. Fallout was truely immersive, you could FEEL the gameworld, the dispair and the sense of clinging to survival.

Death animations - Fallout had spectacular death animations, 2d can do that easily and well, 3d has a harder time, but is still possible. The Havok engine (collision detection engine used in oblivion and damn near every FPS) can set masses of bullets, ect.. So shotguns can send things reeling and blow bits clean (anyone played F.E.A.R.), while miniguns with lower mass rounds can have smaller, but spectacular, spasms and other effects. I hope to see that used to good effect.

No leveling lists for creatures - you level, creatures don't. Level 29 bandits leveling to 30 when you do and suddenly finding and donning full Daedric armor which you haven't even found yet and is massively expensive, far more than a bandit would make, makes no fucking sense and ruins things.



Anyone have any other suggestions I may have missed in my near-dead, post-double-shift state?
 
I would like to bring your attention to a short article in this months PC Powerplay, which is about the use of numbers in RPG games.

As Joshua Hull writes, the problem with RPGs is that they are infested with "these evil bloody numerals!". Numbers were perfectly acceptable to represent a person, effect or damage when graphics couldn't. In this generation of gaming, generating random numbers to decide the outcome of a sword swing is worthless when the outcome is visually apparent to the player.
So what is the alternative? As the article points out, games like Deus Ex and Gothic let the player progress by unlocking game mechanics such as sneaking or alchemy.
"The quicker visuals approach realism, the faster the old rules seem to unstick and appear out of place"
 
Except that that doesn't *really* work. Gamers want a sense of accomplishment when they get somewhere, which is what levels and numbers are good for. They want to see the numbers increase, because that's accomplishment.
It's also a necessary evil, because you must have numbers internally in the game engine anyway. The difference could be in not showing the numerals, however one would then quickly get an Oblivionesque 'Use and progress' system, or a system where you have to go somewhere to learn something (a la Gothic). The first option has obvious downfalls, the second option has the problem that it starts to be unrealistic. 'One second ago I could still learn to whack a sword more properly, but now I can't learn anything new? Pft.'

As for PhredBean, your post is nice, but we have about a dozen 'Here's what Fallout 3 needs' topics around. It's...well, not really something one can discuss a lot about.

Also, you missed choices and consequences.
 
Morry said:
I would like to bring your attention to a short article in this months PC Powerplay, which is about the use of numbers in RPG games.

As Joshua Hull writes, the problem with RPGs is that they are infested with "these evil bloody numerals!". Numbers were perfectly acceptable to represent a person, effect or damage when graphics couldn't. In this generation of gaming, generating random numbers to decide the outcome of a sword swing is worthless when the outcome is visually apparent to the player.
So what is the alternative? As the article points out, games like Deus Ex and Gothic let the player progress by unlocking game mechanics such as sneaking or alchemy.
"The quicker visuals approach realism, the faster the old rules seem to unstick and appear out of place"

Yeah numbers and all that text in RPG makes my ADD flare up too.
 
Sander said:
As for PhredBean, your post is nice, but we have about a dozen 'Here's what Fallout 3 needs' topics around. It's...well, not really something one can discuss a lot about.
True, I started as more of a critique of how I think the oblivion engine would hold up as a platform for the next fallout, but now that I look at it, the focus had shifted. Another reason I shouldn't post tired, I guess... too easy to get sidetracked.

Also, you missed choices and consequences.
Knew I missed something. Think I hit choices in the quests section, but apparently missed consequences/sense of accomplishment.
 
Cimmerian Nights said:
Yeah numbers and all that text in RPG makes my ADD flare up too.

Not sure if you're being sarcastic, but why would you, or anyone else who has ADD and wants games that appeal to and reinforce it, being playing RPGs - games which tradtionally reward and cater to people who enjoy dialogues, text, storylines, and general depth in all aspects of the game? In other words, all that is not appealing to people with 5 second attention spans? Instead of dumbing down rpgs so they appeal to people who can't understand anything that isn't shiny and constantly moving, how about they just eliminate the tedious RPG aspects from the start and design an FPS instead, which is essentially what it will be and what the attention-disordered want?

In other words, what possible appeal could rpgs have to people with ADD?

If you can call a game that's been dumbed down enough to appeal to people who have zero attention span an RPG, why stop there? Call it a Strategy game too, and a business sim, educational game, adventure, etc., as well, since it also has all those elements in extremely simplified form.
 
You lost me after your second sentence. :wink:

I agree with you wholeheartedly, and it's pretty sad that Bethesda panders to the lowest common denominator.
 
Getting Back to the numbers... That's one of the defining properties of RPGs. Nowhere in FPSes or sports games are there numbers to represent a character's proficiency in something, or that that skill increases [or decreases] over time. Most of the other non-RPG games require mostly hand-eye coordination, whereas RPGs themselves can be played by geriatrics but require strategy and planning. Having a visual rather than numerical progression is merely a hybrid of FPS concepts with old RPG tactics.
 
Rickhardslab said:
Nowhere in FPSes or sports games are there numbers to represent a character's proficiency in something, or that that skill increases [or decreases] over time.

That's not right at all. I.e. Daikatana had a skill based character system, of course in a simple way. Regarding sports games I'm quite unsure about that... whereas those football manager-games like On The Ball, especially its sequels, and The Manager had a "skill system".

But in essence you're right. Sticking feathers up your butt doesn’t make you a chicken. And that's one reason why Oblivion is not a CRPG.

Having a visual rather than numerical progression is merely a hybrid of FPS concepts with old RPG tactics.

Again...Oblivion. :D

It's a further step by getting rid off the "invisible dice" during combat to a FPS concept.
 
Fallout 3 should be isometric, end of fucking story. In order to lock the camera in a 3rd-person isometric mode, it'd require alot of work, it would need the ability to cut away ceilings as needed to keep the view without jacking up the camera.

Developers tend to be lazy about that : we're in 2006, it's a classic problem and it has been solved numerous time.
Hell, Dungeon Keeper, and before it, Syndicate Wars had a 3D isometric *free* camera and it was Win95 times !

Anyway, having a 3D isometric view would spare them a huge amount of time concerning the art assets : in the Troika post-apoc game engine demo, what looked nice in 3D almost-isometric view looked like crap in 1st person view.
Then they could use that time to have a really vast and detailed world, and/or work on the obvious things Bethesda might be clueless about : non-linear quests, moral choices and consequences, etc

Let's hope Bethesda will get the hint soon enough ...
 
GOD F*** D*** those F**** F*****

that being said......

It seems that there are pros and cons about beth making fallout 3

Pros

Fallout 3 actually gets made.....it wont just be something my friends and I play on pen and paper using d20 modern books

We get to play it

We get another fallout game


CONS:

We are looking at something that is most likely going to be Oblivion: Fallout Expansion
I really don't think Beth is going to change their shiny new toy (OB engine) all that much for fallout....they might try and implement SPECIAL...but if it wont fit they wont use it and we will have "blunt weapons" replaced with "guns" etc etc etc.....

Fallout 3 done by Beth WILL be dumbed down for a CONSOLE audience....
(even though they dont have the attention span to complete the game nor will they enjoy half the things in it because sooner or later HALO 3 !!!1!!!!11 will come out and they will simply quit playing Fallout)

Lets face it Beth wants to make money and xbox 360 titles sell because there are few games on the market... making games for that platform is a cash cow (people buy them because there aren't many other games to get) Therefore it is certain that beth will make a 360 and PC version....however it will most likely end up as a Xbox port to PC much the way OBlivion was done


ALL this being said keep in mind that I hate 360 and the idiotic way OB was made for it....maybe they will go a different direction with FO3...I can only hope they will!

don't even get me started about the idea of paying for "additional content" for FO3.....I just might shit a brick....
 
JackNight said:
...Fallout 3 done by Beth WILL be dumbed down for a CONSOLE audience (even though they dont have the attention span to complete the game nor will they enjoy half the things in it because sooner or later HALO 3 !!!1!!!!11 will come out and they will simply quit playing Fallout)...

...ALL this being said keep in mind that I hate 360 and the idiotic way OB was made for it....maybe they will go a different direction with FO3...I can only hope they will!...
I agree very much that games appear to be 'dumbed down' on consoles as opposed to a number of hardcore PC classics. While I prefer to game on a console, I'd rather do it with the same quality titles as I've enjoyed on a PC.

Since more and more games are being made on consoles (and maybe less and less on PC?) I'd like to see some companies raise the standard of their console games (at least some segment, like hardcore rpg or turn-based strategy) to match some of the best we've enjoyed on the PC.

Of course there is a larger segment of gamers that are 'graphics whores' and 'fast twitch addicts' than of the hardcore RPG type. I know they have ported games like Commandos II to the XBOX (which is an isometric strategy game - though it did have some control issues), and there are games such as Shattered Union on the XBOX (turn-based strategy I believe). The XBOX, and now the XBOX 360 obviously have the power to run hardcore RPG and strategy games.

The question is how to get game developers to see that while some people enjoy gaming on a PC and others enjoy gaming on a console both can want to enjoy well made, hardcore RPG or strategy games? Is there any way to convince a large gaming company to have a small subdivision (like a Black Isle or Troika type team) to work on these type of games (with hopefully a lower overhead - i.e. less pressure to 'break the graphics barrier' etc.) in order to produce a masterpiece for both PC and Console - even though it would be for a niche market? Is this just a pipe-dream?
 
I think it is a pipe dream. These big companies should be working overtime to get talent to make RPs. Make a straight up RP division and dig out all those talents. Let a group devote themselves to D&D and others to Post apocalypse.
 
The way I see it, Fallout 3 is going to be NOTHING like the original Fallouts, we (the fans) will most likly buy it because of the name and not because 'it looks brilliant fun'.

The simplest way to make Fallout 3 IMO would be to take the Fallout 1 (and 2) engine, give it a new lick of paint and modernise it (without totally converting it) so that it is at least on the level with most other games currently out there, graphics wise and so on.

If F3 is a FPS, I am going to smash the shelfing unit I see it stacked on, I swear to god. Fallout is ANYTHING but a FPS, keeping it isometric and turn based combat (as I said, the F1 engine) is the way fallout should be. One of the reasons people hated craptics was because it was built to be real time, which made it suck and blow big time.

As has been already said, F3 is going to be on Oblivion so we are all royally fucked no matter how it goes. I agree with everything said in the first post, keep it fallout, dont mutalate it to fit around your shiny new engine.

Hell, I would be happy if Fallout 3 was released on the Fallout 1 engine unchanged! I think that would be better than on Oblvion, of corse I could be wrong. Bethesda might do a damn fine job with Fallout on Oblivion, so long as they get the details right. Making a 'Morrowind: Fallout Expansion', which is very likly what they will do, is going to destroy Fallout in my eyes.

"You see level 17 raider." - One of my fears. The player levels up, creatures dont. Having a system somthing like "You see a tough raider." "You see a rookie raider." this would be much better, lesser raider, hardcore raider, text based indicators of how 'tough' they are. Reading off how tough they are in comparison to your character is going to suck, big time.

Another one of my fears is spending endless hours traping accross the wastes, not encountering anything (a la morrowind). Keep the damn map system, PLEASE! The map system is what makes Fallout Fallout IMO. No one wants to spend three quaters of an hour trying to cross a mountain range, killing worthless creatures for insignificant ammounts of XP, just to pick up some bloody special hammer (a la morrowind).

Thats another thing; Spending time in the 'wilds' hunting creatures to level up. It could be good, if there was a set hunting ground (like say, one map which is well known for being full with rats, pig rats, mole rats etc) it could work well and help players advance at their own pace, as I remember the only way to reach level 18+ in Fallout was to exploit the Deathclaw nest over and over in the boneyard. Having an endless stream of enemies (like in a hunting ground) would be better, because then you could spend time leveling at your own rate. So you could choose to home your skills, or continue on to the next area for faster advancement.

Of course, it more likly to go horribly wrong and leave players being forced to spend hours of gameplay hunting rats just so that they are strong enough to get past one band of enemies, and there after everything else is relativly simple, until you run accross the next band of tough enemies and have to spend hours leveling against creatures, again.

Basically this all boils down to the ultimate point in making games.
Any idea can be sound, its the exacution of it which determins wether or not its good. Personally I think Fallout 3 is going to suck so hard it could rip your eyes back through your sockets, but then I could be wrong. Bethesda could do an excellent job. I guess we will all just have to wait until Bethesda release some content examples.
 
First of all, I don't think Bethesda will make something as good as the original Fallout games. But what I do believe is that Fallout 3 will be a great game no matter what. Worst case scenario is that it turns in to a Deus Ex IW, with the individual game being a great game by itself, but holds none of the original atmosphere or features that made the original even better.

With regards to the engine, unless Bethesda were hoping to make a game designed for 10 years ago, there is no way it will not go without significant graphical upgrades from the likes of the original. It would be like designing a sidescroller game with the hope of sales surpassing the latest FPS. It simply is not a risk anyone in the game design area would be willing to take unless they wanted to lose money on a game. Using the GameBryo engine does not mean it will be an FPS, camera angles are easily modified these days and Bethesda may even go for isometric after all.

No one wants to spend three quaters of an hour trying to cross a mountain range, killing worthless creatures for insignificant ammounts of XP, just to pick up some bloody special hammer (a la morrowind).
I know plenty of people who happily spent hours wandering around the Cyrodiil countryside, stumbling on a new cave or shrine. It would be great to have this feature in the Fallout universe. With the introduction of Fast Travel, you can now have options for both styles of play.

My main point is that almost every feature you guys have brought up can be implemented on the GameBryo engine. You want isometric? It just requires placing the camera above the player. Easily done. You want better atmosphere and character interaction and AI? It just requires giving the NPCs more goals for their Radiant AI routines.
Anything is possible, it's just what the developers plan to do.
I trust Bethesda to make a great game and I hope that they will make a great Fallout 3 too.
 
Tycell said:
The simplest way to make Fallout 3 IMO would be to take the Fallout 1 (and 2) engine, give it a new lick of paint and modernise it (without totally converting it) so that it is at least on the level with most other games currently out there, graphics wise and so on.
Don't be ridiculous. Fallout engine is 12 years old and doesn't run properly on any operating system newer than Windows 98. Not everyone has a P5 133 lying about, so it is imperative that Fallout gets a brand new engine; the only issue is which. My personal preference would be an isometric 3D engine with all the latest bells and whistles, like the one Troika (RIP) developed for their cancelled PA CRPG.

As has been already said, F3 is going to be on Oblivion so we are all royally fucked no matter how it goes. I agree with everything said in the first post, keep it fallout, dont mutalate it to fit around your shiny new engine.
There is no reason not to use the Oblivion renderer rather than write every single component of the engine from ground up. In fact, I'd say that Oblivion engine is even more suitable for an isometric game than an FPS because of the problems it has with scalable level of detail on distant objects.

Hell, I would be happy if Fallout 3 was released on the Fallout 1 engine unchanged! I think that would be better than on Oblvion, of corse I could be wrong.
It would be better. It would also be incompatible with most systems assembled after 1999.

If I were you, I'd be more concerned about the fact that Bethesda currently employs game designers who are so utterly inept that they make Capstone (RIP, thankfully) seem outright competent in comparison.

Morry said:
Worst case scenario is that it turns in to a Deus Ex IW, with the individual game being a great game by itself, but holds none of the original atmosphere or features that made the original even better.
Deus Ex IW was a great game? I must have missed that.

I must have also missed the fact that Bethesda has the capacity to deliver a great game. You know, considering that everything they made since 1996 has been utter shit.

I know plenty of people who happily spent hours wandering around the Cyrodiil countryside, stumbling on a new cave or shrine. It would be great to have this feature in the Fallout universe. With the introduction of Fast Travel, you can now have options for both styles of play.
Out of the question. I don't know if you noticed, but all of Cyrodiil could fit inside one square of FO2 world map. Unless BethSoft plan to spend the next twenty years modelling about a million square kilometers of west US, they better go with classic Fallout-style travel.
 
Ratty said:
Don't be ridiculous. Fallout engine is 12 years old and doesn't run properly on any operating system newer than Windows 98. Not everyone has a P5 133 lying about, so it is imperative that Fallout gets a brand new engine; the only issue is which. My personal preference would be an isometric 3D engine with all the latest bells and whistles, like the one Troika (RIP) developed for their cancelled PA CRPG.

Or the engine of Van Buren. That one was already slightly out of date, but would have worked fine for iso-3D.

There is no reason not to use the Oblivion renderer rather than write every single component of the engine from ground up. In fact, I'd say that Oblivion engine is even more suitable for an isometric game than an FPS because of the problems it has with scalable level of detail on distant objects.

Sure. While not used that way, the Oblivion engine would do fine in 3D.

Out of the question. I don't know if you noticed, but all of Cyrodiil could fit inside one square of FO2 world map. Unless BethSoft plan to spend the next twenty years modelling about a million square kilometers of west US, they better go with classic Fallout-style travel.

Second problem, Cyrodiil is a pretty crowded place. Not crowded with cities, but crowded with critters and dungeons (more dungeons than actual buildings, almost, one would think that civilization is quite in decline).

Fallout avoided feeling crowded because the actual distance and time you would travel before seeing *anything* of interest was huge. If you replace this with running from place to place, you'd either have to make the player run for miles in empty desert or fill up the desert with cave complex and molerats-turning-into-radscorpions-turning-into-floaters-turning-into-deathclaws encounters. That would hardly work.
 
Thank you Kharn, you cleared that up nicly.

From what I have seen of Oblivion and what I know of how most Morrowind games go, putting Fallout 3 into Oblivion is going to be a BAD IDEA. 1) The actual playing area would have to be tiny, as Kharn said. 2) In Morrowind like titles, there are hundreds of caves and dungeons to scavenge awesome weapons from, infact there are more bandit caves than actual cities, surley this means the bandits would rule the continent?

Now consider this aspect mixed Fallout, hundreds of buildings and underground complexes just waiting to be raided full of nice stuff? Oh because the general survivors of Fallout never though of raiding them themselfs in the what, 200 years since the war? Please.

3) Fallout is ment to be wide open and filled with desolate wastes, if built on oblivion (without the good old fallout travel system) that means either everything is going to be crammed into a tiny space (I belive it was rumoured that F3 would take place in one city?) or the player is going to have to spend a LOT of time trapsing accross endless plains of generated nothingness, praying that they will encounter a rat just to aliviate the bordom.

If its not got the old Fallout travel style its going to look very stupid. "We need caravan gaurds to move from A to B, it pays 2000, you in?" "Sure" *five minuets later* "Whoa what a ride, we encountered seven groups of raiders on our half a kilometer trip, good work, heres you money."
 
Setting FO3 only in ruins of a city like LA would still mean it's bigger than Cyrodiil. Also a nuked out, irradiated and abandoned LA would still probably have more citizens than Cyrodiil...




Again, nice work, Beth. :roll:
 
Back
Top