Turn based, Real time or other?

[Tycell]

Simple concept really, which do you think Fallout should be?

Turn based - Like the original. This one gets my vote, the main reason being that you can take your time and plan your move, it makes the game more appealing to the older and more tactical generation, rather than the "Lololol shot ever-e1" chaotic play of a real time.

Real time - Dont get me wrong, this option has its good points too, watching a battle in real time between raiders would be pretty good, but it would also be very chaotic and I think the AI might well not work as effectivly as they would in Turn Based. Also, working out all the stats, critical chances and so on of every character in a battle might well lag the battle.

Other - I had somthing in mind like a mix between the two, where you could take your time choosing what you wanted to do (Shoot at raider 1, move to the left, take a target shot at raider 2) and then once you had choosen what you wanted to do, the game would then sync all the computer based opponents into your move. So you have a paused moment where you pick your move, then a moment of action as these moves are made in real time allong with the moves of all the other critters on the map, then you go back to being paused again. I think this would be very difficult to pull off however and could be annoying, what if you get a critical hit at the start of the 'action' and get KOed, also, all the combat and stats running at once might, again, lag the game and render some perks / stats irrelivant.

Overall Turn Based gets my vote, its by far the most superior combat system for Fallout, even more so when used in conjunction with the SPECIAL system.

But what do you think? Which would you prefer and which do you think BethSoft will end up using?

 

[Ratty Sr.]

Turn-based, because it offers the biggest tactical and roleplaying depth and because it's part of the Fallout ruleset.

Other - I had somthing in mind like a mix between the two, where you could take your time choosing what you wanted to do (Shoot at raider 1, move to the left, take a target shot at raider 2) and then once you had choosen what you wanted to do, the game would then sync all the computer based opponents into your move. So you have a paused moment where you pick your move, then a moment of action as these moves are made in real time allong with the moves of all the other critters on the map, then you go back to being paused again. I think this would be very difficult to pull off however and could be annoying, what if you get a critical hit at the start of the 'action' and get KOed, also, all the combat and stats running at once might, again, lag the game and render some perks / stats irrelivant.

That system is called phase-based or phased combat and it's been in existence for only thirty years or so.

 

[Punck_D]

Turn-based of course. I like to use my brain and not to rape my mouse. For mixed up combat style i've never seen a decent solution in any game.
Looking at my other wishes for Fallout 3 TB-combat would not be avoidable because it's, like Ratty already pointed out "part of Fallout's ruleset". You could change the formula in some way, but not its main ingredients.

and which do you think BethSoft will end up using?

Any thoughts regarding that will only make my headache getting worse.

 

[RPGenius]

RPGenius says yes to Turn Based.

 

[Hotel California]

"Phased - based" (Insert Peter Kay voice here)

*Shudder*

Please, oh please read this thread for a lengthy discussion on why Phased based make most of us NMAers shiver!

I'm glad you're not supporting it, because for Beth to even consider it makes my blood run cold.

 

[Tycell]

Turn-based of course. I like to use my brain and not to rape my mouse.

That made me laugh, not because its got a comical use of abusive words, because its true.

Hotel California: Ah yes, interesting discussion. Though I think the idea does have good points if you want to make Fallout an RTS, the system discribed has no place in Fallout proper.

As was said, Fallout is about the lone wonderer, NPC's are just a gimic not a nessesity.

Seeing as the large majority of Fallout fans support the idea of having turn based combat (it wouldnt really be fallout without it) do you think we should start a petition?

 

[Ratty Sr.]

Seeing as the large majority of Fallout fans support the idea of having turn based combat (it wouldnt really be fallout without it) do you think we should start a petition?

Hell no, that might encourage TES fans to start a petition for first-person real-time combat, which would likely overshadow ours in a matter of days.

 

[Tycell]

Your probably right.

Urge to hurt TES fans... rising!

 

[Richoid]

I actually believe that real time is the best option for F3, turn based simply could not work well in good graphics, the game needs good graphics so it needs to be real time.

 

[DirtyDreamDesigner]

Can we fucking ban him now?

 

[Sander]

I actually believe that real time is the best option for F3, turn based simply could not work well in good graphics, the game needs good graphics so it needs to be real time.

*blinks*
This is now officially the worst reason I've ever heard for thinking turn-based will suck. Better graphics will make it suck. Because graphics determine game features.
I think my brain is catching on fire again.

For fuck's sake, Richoid, go read some of the old threads and offer any kind of proper argument. Anything. At all. Anything better than this. Please.

 

[Punck_D]

I actually believe that real time is the best option for F3, turn based simply could not work well in good graphics, the game needs good graphics so it needs to be real time.

Apart from the relativeness of the term "good graphics" and your ignorance you confirmed once again with this statement (no, i won't use the word "argument"), there are TB-games with "good graphics" or at least ambitioned graphics like Silent Storm. I also think that Fallout has good graphics which is more emphasized in world details than graphic FX and polygons.

So, like to explain more detailed?

 

[Lazarus Plus]

You know what? I'm sure, if the creators of F3 had any kind of creativity they could find a way, quite easily, of making a turn based combat and game system look JUST AS GOOD as real time.

Sheesh.

 

[Roshambo]

I actually believe that real time is the best option for F3, turn based simply could not work well in good graphics, the game needs good graphics so it needs to be real time.

Is it your life's mission to state the most unbelievably retarded things you can come up with? Do you seriously have no ability to sit back and think "Now, if I said that, people are going to consider me to be an idiot" before you hit the "Post Reply" button? But what else can you expect from a child who already requires learning aids and yet presumes to try and instruct others? It's a shame that LeapFrog doesn't have any educational material for Fallout, huh? Such as the fact of fictional maps being used, and that you can draw from the fictional maps from Fallout onto a real map, as if it has some meaning when many Fo2 cities are skewed horribly in geography.

Furthermore, if you want to be using that image I made, I think you can wear it in your .sig, as I originally designed it for.

Back On Topic:
TB and RT can have the same graphics, and do when a game has both systems used, which is evident with X-COM: Apocalypse, FOT, and Arcanum.

 

[Ratty Sr.]

I actually believe that real time is the best option for F3, turn based simply could not work well in good graphics, the game needs good graphics so it needs to be real time.

...

It's as if you embarked on a crusade against intelligence.

 

[uziel]

Oh my fucking god...

GOOD GRAPHICS DOES NOT MEAN A GOOD fucking GAME, GOD DAMMIT!

Hah, I feel better. That needs to be stickied as a reminder.

Anyway, I do kinda like the phase combat, as it would make battles go faster and better-looking and just plain cool. It would also retain teh fallout feel to it.

But because I'm such a loyal fan, I still have to vote for the turn-base AP system.

And TBS fans can kiss my ass, it's not their damn game, it's ours. Vive le Fallout!

 

[Carib FMJ]

Fallout is nothing without turn based.

 

[zioburosky13]

I actually believe that real time is the best option for F3, turn based simply could not work well in good graphics, the game needs good graphics so it needs to be real time.

We will buy good graphics (2D or 3D. As long it has isometric view and free-camera view).

But losing turn-based combat is not an option. I can't imagine playing Fallout in real-time.. (oh wait, I can and it's called Fallout :tactics. Good game but not great.)

 

[Tycell]

GOOD GRAPHICS DOES NOT MEAN A GOOD fucking GAME, GOD DAMMIT!

Amen to that!

Such as the fact of fictional maps being used, and that you can draw from the fictional maps from Fallout onto a real map, as if it has some meaning when many Fo2 cities are skewed horribly in geography.

You realise that the geography in that area is changing right? Land mass isnt set, for example in wales (UK) castles which were once on the coast as little as 200 years ago are now one mile from the nearest beach, where the other side of the coast (East England) is shrinking, old light houses and structures falling into the sea. With all the nuclear war spewing millions of tons of earth into the sky its quite feasable to assume that the coast line has change considerably, granted not THAT much though. Your point still stands however.

You know what? I'm sure, if the creators of F3 had any kind of creativity they could find a way, quite easily, of making a turn based combat and game system look JUST AS GOOD as real time.

Agreed.

Can we fucking ban him now?

Although I agree whole heartedly with your statement, banning somone because there opinion does not conform isnt really cricket (Somones got to play devils advocate).

 

[uziel]

When I first joined I recieved an embarrasing avatar just because I asked for the figures and stuff from the game.

Don't be surprised.

((I still object to what happened, but the way I reacted afterwards was my own damn fault.))