What engine SHOULD the Fallout Series run on?

[The Suave Gambler]

If you could go back before Fallout 3, what engine would you place it and New Vegas on? Personally I'd have preferred this

1. Can play the game in Isometric or First Person, but Isometric would act differently than FO2. It'd work more like Project Zomboid's combat with VATS.
2. The game should look as close as possible to its incredible concept art.

 

[Surf Solar]

1. Can play the game in Isometric or First Person

There is no need to reinvent the wheel. Make it like the originals, update graphics (or don't at all, I wouldn't care) a wee bit, done.

 

[WelcomeToNewReno]

This is a futile question. Almost everyone on these forums would prefer the original engine 1 and 2 ran on. I know some would disagree, hense the almost.

 

[Tagaziel]

This is a futile question. Almost everyone on these forums would prefer the original engine 1 and 2 ran on. I know some would disagree, hense the almost.

What? No one would want the original engine back. It was fine in 1997, but lacks a lot of features necessary to make a 2D engine really good. Compare it to eg. Diablo 2, which has segmented sprites, lighting, weather effects etc. The engine Van Buren ran on was ideal, IF IT WAS FINISHED.

 

[CthuluIsSpy]

Would an isometric view even sell in today's market?
I could imagine a few die hard fans getting it, but would it reach as much popularity as Bethesda's version?

 

[The Suave Gambler]

Would an isometric view even sell in today's market?
I could imagine a few die hard fans getting it, but would it reach as much popularity as Bethesda's version?

This

This is the reason I chose both Iso and First Person

Bethesda made a right choice in making it first person, but executed it VERY poorly.

 

[Surf Solar]

This is a futile question. Almost everyone on these forums would prefer the original engine 1 and 2 ran on. I know some would disagree, hense the almost.

What? No one would want the original engine back. It was fine in 1997, but lacks a lot of features necessary to make a 2D engine really good. Compare it to eg. Diablo 2, which has segmented sprites, lighting, weather effects etc. The engine Van Buren ran on was ideal, IF IT WAS FINISHED.

All of these feautures could (and were, by modders) be easily included in the engine. The Fallout engine had a lighting system, just for your interest. The jump from 2d to 3d in the Van Buren engine was the biggest mistake they could make, early 2000 3d graphics look very crappy in hindsight, whileas the Fallout1/2s 2d graphic is timeless and still looks very good.

This is the reason I chose both Iso and First Person

You realize that by choosing an Isometric perspective it is more of a design decision than "lol let's place the camera above the head"? A first person perspective would go against that very idea.

Bethesda made a right choice in making it first person,

 

[Sabirah]

It should have an engine specifically tailored to that particular game.

On the topic of Isometric or First person I prefer third person to both but given the choice between those too I would pick first person. Isometric view really takes you out of the experience IMO.

 

[Ben]

I want one on the Grand Theft Auto engine

 

[ZeusComplex]

Isometric view really takes you out of the experience IMO.

I honestly don't get this. Fallout 1 & 2 still felt Post Apocalyptic to me. Much more so than a first person view. If anything, the first person makes the limitations of Fallout 3 that much more obvious. Which you know, took me out of the experience.

It works for space sims, and straight up action games, but Fallout wasn't built upon that. They took "this" and made it into "that." Definitely created some serious flaws in my opinion.

 

[Sabirah]

Isometric view really takes you out of the experience IMO.

I honestly don't get this. Fallout 1 & 2 still felt Post Apocalyptic to me. Much more so than a first person view. If anything, the first person makes the limitations of Fallout 3 that much more obvious. Which you know, took me out of the experience.

It works for space sims, and straight up action games, but Fallout wasn't built upon that. They took "this" and made it into "that." Definitely created some serious flaws in my opinion.

oh it did look post apocalyptic still yeah (and graphics were so bad at the time isometric was the only way to go with such a large game and make it look good) But it felt... How do I explain it, It felt like I was clearly separated from the PC in them. The closer the camera is, the more it feels like you are in the game rather than controlling a fellow in it.

In Fallout NV you are Maria Santiago (or whatever you named your courier). The first person helps to emphasize the open ended feeling somehow.


Just my opinion though, maybe it's just because you can see farther in first person

 

[Surf Solar]

Isometric view really takes you out of the experience IMO.

I honestly don't get this. Fallout 1 & 2 still felt Post Apocalyptic to me. Much more so than a first person view. If anything, the first person makes the limitations of Fallout 3 that much more obvious. Which you know, took me out of the experience.

It works for space sims, and straight up action games, but Fallout wasn't built upon that. They took "this" and made it into "that." Definitely created some serious flaws in my opinion.

oh it did look post apocalyptic still yeah (and graphics were so bad at the time isometric was the only way to go with such a large game and make it look good) But it felt... How do I explain it, It felt like I was clearly separated from the PC in them. The closer the camera is, the more it feels like you are in the game rather than controlling a fellow in it.

That's because you aren't meant to "be" that character, you only control it. These games always clearly seperated the player from the character, like it should be done.

 

[The Suave Gambler]

Welp

Someones got a case of "stop liking what I don't like".

An Isometric RTS would have a very cult following in todays market unless it was as action packed as an FPS (IE Project Zomboid)

 

[Tagaziel]

All of these feautures could (and were, by modders) be easily included in the engine. The Fallout engine had a lighting system, just for your interest. The jump from 2d to 3d in the Van Buren engine was the biggest mistake they could make, early 2000 3d graphics look very crappy in hindsight, whileas the Fallout1/2s 2d graphic is timeless and still looks very good.

No, they weren't. Fallout still doesn't have segmented sprites, the lighting system is primitive (compare that to Diablo II) and weather effects? Sorry, what? I must've missed rain (confirmed to exist by Fo1 ambient dialogue), dust storms and visual effects.

As for Fallout 1/2 2D graphics being timeless? Only if you use a higher resolution mode. Van Buren's graphics engine was unfinished: if you draw conclusions from that, you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

And FYI, Continuum, author of many significant graphics mods for classics Fallouts, familiar with the engine, considers the Fallout engine to be shit.

 

[Atomkilla]

Alien Shooter Vengeance engine would be the best for an Fallout game.

 

[Surf Solar]

All of these feautures could (and were, by modders) be easily included in the engine. The Fallout engine had a lighting system, just for your interest. The jump from 2d to 3d in the Van Buren engine was the biggest mistake they could make, early 2000 3d graphics look very crappy in hindsight, whileas the Fallout1/2s 2d graphic is timeless and still looks very good.

No, they weren't. Fallout still doesn't have segmented sprites, the lighting system is primitive (compare that to Diablo II) and weather effects? Sorry, what? I must've missed rain (confirmed to exist by Fo1 ambient dialogue), dust storms and visual effects.

As for Fallout 1/2 2D graphics being timeless? Only if you use a higher resolution mode. Van Buren's graphics engine was unfinished: if you draw conclusions from that, you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

And FYI, Continuum, author of many significant graphics mods for classics Fallouts, familiar with the engine, considers the Fallout engine to be shit.

"Some guy sais it's shit, so it must be so"

Yes, he probably is the only one ever doing graphics for that game, hm? Me and many other people doing the same must all be clueless idiots then.

If you would have actually read my post you would've also see that I didn't say that Fallout has these segmented sprites or elaborate lighting system (which I fail to see is any more advanced in Diablo II) but could've been easily added without making a whole new engine. That was my point - building up on an existing one, instead of trying to reinvent the wheel. Any graphic resolution used on the game has nothing to do with the quality of the base content of the art, how you draw this conclusion is beyond me.

As for weather effects, people made some of them thanks to the sfall tools from Timeslip, I tried to find the thread (it was directly in some sfall megathread I believe) but frankly, the search engine here is a bit wonky.

Yes it is true we haven't seen the finished shading and whatnot of Van Buren, but I was talking about early 2000 3d games in general, none of these games (that I know of atleast - I wouldn't mind for some counter-examples) looks very good by todays standards, while most of the 2d games didn't lose their beauty. But I believe we already had the same discussion about it elsewhere and ended up disagreeing again with each other, so let's not repeat exactly the same.

 

[bhazo]

I would have loved Bioware to have gotten the license and released FO3 with the engine they used in Dragon's Age. I just liked the fine grit control of the party member's combat AI. Plus I think they have more entertaining NPCs.

 

[Oppen]

I would have loved Bioware to have gotten the license and released FO3 with the engine they used in Dragon's Age. I just liked the fine grit control of the party member's combat AI. Plus I think they have more entertaining NPCs.

And then, they could give us a shitty ending

 

[bhazo]

I would have loved Bioware to have gotten the license and released FO3 with the engine they used in Dragon's Age. I just liked the fine grit control of the party member's combat AI. Plus I think they have more entertaining NPCs.

And then, they could give us a shitty ending

No arguments there. But I'd rather have a shitty ending than a shitty game.

 

[Oppen]

I would have loved Bioware to have gotten the license and released FO3 with the engine they used in Dragon's Age. I just liked the fine grit control of the party member's combat AI. Plus I think they have more entertaining NPCs.

And then, they could give us a shitty ending

No arguments there. But I'd rather have a shitty ending than a shitty game.

Agree, sort of. It was a joke anyway :p