Tim Cain interview on Matt Chat, part 2
- Thread starter Per
- Start date
100LBSofDogmeat
It Wandered In From the Wastes
i've really enjoyed both of these and look forward to the third.
ah, but that last bit is a little sad... as now poor fallout is in the hands of bethesda.
ah, but that last bit is a little sad... as now poor fallout is in the hands of bethesda.
bonustime
First time out of the vault
It was definitely sad towards the end. It really is a shame how since the release of Fallout Tim Cain has kind of been limited by the business end of things(he has always been my favorite of the Fallout team). The things he mentioned about Fallout 2, his own failings at running Trokia. Hopefully the people at NCSoft are letting him do what he is good at, but I am pretty skeptical of a Korean MMORPG company.
I'm glad Bethesda got it, they made a damn good game. So what, they changed the formula a bit. Change is the life force of society. Most of the changes they made were beneficial to the series, as is clearly evidenced by the thousands more people who enjoyed the game.
bonustime
First time out of the vault
Very few people here would agree with you. So unless you are trying to troll you are probably better off voicing that opinion elsewhere.
Paul_cz
Mildly Dipped
One one hand, I would love to see Van Buren or what would Troika do with it (or with its own post-apo), but on the other, I really enjoyed Fallout 3 despite its many faults. Plus, now they gave it to Obsidian which to me is really the best thing that could happen.
I would list one "improvement" of FO3 over previous ones - exploration aspect. That is something I love in games (right now I am playing Risen which absolutely excels in this) and while previous Fallout games did not have it due to their style, FO3 is based on it and is great, the world is fun and often times beautifully destroyed.
Dialogues and quests are worse in FO3, but still competent and better than in, say, Oblivion
.
Anyway, these interviews are amazing, I really like Tim.
I would list one "improvement" of FO3 over previous ones - exploration aspect. That is something I love in games (right now I am playing Risen which absolutely excels in this) and while previous Fallout games did not have it due to their style, FO3 is based on it and is great, the world is fun and often times beautifully destroyed.
Dialogues and quests are worse in FO3, but still competent and better than in, say, Oblivion
.Anyway, these interviews are amazing, I really like Tim.
choconutjoe
First time out of the vault
Tim Cain seemed to be vaguely positive about FO3, interestingly.
I agree, while MW2 can be enjoyable, the earlier titles were much better. For their time, anyway. But the major video game consuming demographic is the kind of people who like games with action, explosions, guns, and guts. Stuff you guys probably find juvenile or something.
However, I can guarantee you that if you took a random group of a million people, the vast majority of them would rank F3 as better than F1 and F2. I think that is what constitutes a "better" or "good" game, is a game that appeals to a lot of people. And almost all major video game reviews for F3 and MW2 were positive, i.e. above 85% score. But those games still suck, right?
I admit, there are a few exceptions, where underground games can be quite good, but these come far and few between. Any game has detractors, people who don't like it, and while they may think it is a bad game, that don't mean it is bad. While goodness and badness is mostly opinion, when most people agree on a certain side, then one can accurately state that it is "good" or "bad". Y'all are on the opposition against F3, so while you are entitled to your opinion, you have to remember that it is just that, an opinion. A fact about the game perceived by the mind, which in everyone is full of bias.
However, I can guarantee you that if you took a random group of a million people, the vast majority of them would rank F3 as better than F1 and F2. I think that is what constitutes a "better" or "good" game, is a game that appeals to a lot of people. And almost all major video game reviews for F3 and MW2 were positive, i.e. above 85% score. But those games still suck, right?
I admit, there are a few exceptions, where underground games can be quite good, but these come far and few between. Any game has detractors, people who don't like it, and while they may think it is a bad game, that don't mean it is bad. While goodness and badness is mostly opinion, when most people agree on a certain side, then one can accurately state that it is "good" or "bad". Y'all are on the opposition against F3, so while you are entitled to your opinion, you have to remember that it is just that, an opinion. A fact about the game perceived by the mind, which in everyone is full of bias.
choconutjoe said:
He loved the one thing that imo was its shining quality. The sweeping landscapes and architecture. From a distance the games environments are quite pretty and give a great sense of scale to the world. Unfortunately it doesn't give you any sense of how shallow that world is.
NiRv4n4 said:
Fact: The larger the scope of the PR and Media buy the better the game will be reviewed and the more popular it will be. It wont make a bad game reviewed as 'good' but it will certainly give it a bump up on the scale. A game that would normally be considered average may get much higher marks from companies if the media push is large. Look at the Kayne and Lynch fiasco, everyone gave it fairly good marks except one guy who spoke his mind and got fired for it.
People do what they are told, and that is why score inflation is such a commonly seen aspect of gaming/movie journalism these days, every movie that comes out is "number one in america" or "an instant classic" "4 stars" because as shallow and unlikely as it may seem, many people actually BELIEVE that and use it to base their decisions on what to spend their money on.
choconutjoe said:
He made a great game
interplay kicked the team to maximize profit and teared apart fallout making some stupid action game on consoles
than beth tried to make a sequel and we got a F3, not the one we hoped for, but a nice game...
I think that at least few beth developers really loved fallout, but they are not good in story telling and the thing beth is good at is the TES series... so they applied their skills on fallout and F3 is the result.
IMO it is possible that Tim is happy seeing his creature alive again and many new players enjoying the settings he created.
please correct me if i'm wrong and forgive my bad eng
Getting a conspiracy theorist vibe from you, hehe..... Sure, the media isn't quite the beacon of truth that we wish it would be, but it isn't a Göbbels led propaganda machine like some of us thing. I think you are being overly paranoid about that though. I got Fallout 3 because I heard it was good, and when I played it, it was good, and I enjoyed it very much. Many others feel the same, a lot more than feel otherwise. We live in a world where "might is right", or "majority controls minority". We see it in politics, we see it in every fiber of the western world. The reviewers for F3 brought up many good points about F3 in their reviews, in addition to some bad ones. But they recognized that in that case, good outweighed bad. For them, anyway. But when "them" is the vast majority of gaming reviewers, then we either have a good game or a huge conspiracy going on. To me, one sounds a little more convincing than the other.
Winchester
First time out of the vault
Paul_cz said:
False. The original Fallouts had plenty of exploration.
NiRv4n4 said:
That's textbook argumentum ad populum right there. Just because a large number of gamers might think Fallout 3 is a good game does not mean it really is.
really? i am not too sure, he did said that FO3 dev team did a great job at capturing the city area and subways and that it was fun to look at.choconutjoe said:
but i doubt that he think that FO3 managed to capture the FO spirit unless you refer to the FO2 marketing department spirit ...
I don't much care for Bertrand Russell. He could also have said the same for a "good" thing. For the most part, when it comes to entertainment the public knows what they want. Buying a video game is a lot different from buying tickets to a movie, people put more thought into it. When a bunch of people agree that they like something, that whilst playing they are not under mind control by the government, then there is some credence to their opinions on the matter. Basically, whether or not any of this reasoning makes sense, almost everyone who played F3 thoroughly enjoyed it. Saying that despite this the game is still bad, is like saying that the Republic of Ireland is Protestant because of Ulster.
choconutjoe
First time out of the vault
It's possible. But he certainly didn't say so in that video.mor said: