Fallout 3: New screenshots from OXM US

[Tagaziel]

http://www.nma-fallout.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=41454

Okay, a review.

1) The ghoul looks good, really good, following the aesthetic of previous Fallouts.

Also, guys, note the adjective "Feral" implying it's a wild, crazed type of ghoul. Just like the ones you met in Necropolis.

2) The status screen is not bad, it definitely echoes the character sheet's status pictures.

3) I like it. I really do. I can't lay a finger on what makes me like it, but I do...

4) Oh yeah, this is really special. I'll propably follow Briosa's advice and keep a save at the end of the creation process if there is no way to skip it.

5) The Behemoth looks better from this angle... still don't know WHAT THE **** IS HE SUPPOSED TO BE.

6) Is this shot awesome or what? IT IS. I ABSOLUTELY LOVE THIS SHOT.

7) Not bad from an atmospheric point of view, has a slight Junktown vibe.

8) It's good, really good. The armour from this angle looks like properly powered armour (exoskeleton and such), the minigun is used properly too... definitely not a bad shot.

9) Haha, they couldn't resist making a Mad Max'esque shot

10) Hmm... not bad character art, though the dialogue interface... hmm, it actually breaks immersion, contrary to what they wanted to achieve. Give me my CRT monitor back.

11) MP9 at last!

Though I'd like to ask one thing - why was the mutant breakdancing on his head?

Overall, I'm pleasantly surprised by the screenshots.

Waiting for the inevitable Kyorisu's "**** YOU GUYS AND YOUR FAMILIES" post.

EDIT:

 

[Jintor]

Holy shit, Grizzly offers his good opinion!

World implodes!

 

[Tagaziel]

Nah, just Kyorisu, I think he won't be able to...

 

[99.vikram]

Well, at least Brother None isn't as rabid this time. Although DarkLegacy and DarkPhilly more than make up for it.

It hurts me when such 'tards call themselves fans of something. They aren't fans, and never were. They probably would have ganged up to worship some other cult classic if Fallout 3 hadn't been announced.

 

[Tagaziel]

Kharn ain't generally rabid. He is the one who disciplines everybody and, together with SuaSide, responsible for creating an honest, moderate preview, which is neither sucking off Bethesda (as most out there) nor trashes it.

 

[Kyorisu]

Waiting for the inevitable Kyorisu's "**** YOU GUYS AND YOUR FAMILIES" post

Why would I do that?

Nah, just Kyorisu, I think he won't be able to...

lol nice.

Screenshots are nice but I bloody well hope they do better than Oblivion's yawn inducing character animations. By which every person you speak to looks entirely life less.

 

[Tagaziel]

Why would I do that?

Since pretty much your every post in F3 threads is "lol NMA sucks".

 

[Kyorisu]

That must have been another me.

 

[jimbo118]

Looks cool. Shame devs still can't make rubble look anything better than a grey blob texture.

 

[Gargantou]

It's a shame reading that thread seeing all the people whine, as though Bethesda OWES them something..

Anyway I think the screens look good, I look forward to playing Fallout 3, make no mistake I doubt it'll be anywhere as good as Fallout 1, but I do believe it will be a fairly amusing game.

 

[Warbie]

That looks awesome

 

[Gargantou]

I've noticed sea, I feel honest to God, that how much the Fallout-fanboys whine is amazing, Bethesda aren't forcing them via gunpoint to buy Fallout 3, are they?

If you don't like how Fallout 3 turns out, DON'T BUY IT, simple as that.

It'd be great if some of the people on that forum put as much energy into making the world a better place as they do into bashing Fallout 3.

 

[Warbie]

Obviously he wasn't bashing you, as can be seen in the words in his post

 

[Kyorisu]

I will, in the future, endeavour to accommodate others more.

By lining them up and pushing them off a cliff one by one? That's how I'd do things.

 

[Gargantou]

Nono, I was not accusing you, I meant the people on the NMA forums.

 

[Tagaziel]

Oh, it's quite simple. You see, Bethesda isn't allowed any creative freedom and cannot deviate in any way from the established Fallout art style or conventions, in no matter how minor a way, without invoking the fires of Hell.

Uh, no. That's an idiot's claim we/I repeatedly disproved.

I've noticed sea, I feel honest to God, that how much the Fallout-fanboys whine is amazing, Bethesda aren't forcing them via gunpoint to buy Fallout 3, are they?

If you don't like how Fallout 3 turns out, DON'T BUY IT, simple as that.

It'd be great if some of the people on that forum put as much energy into making the world a better place as they do into bashing Fallout 3.

If you would actually read the forums, you would notice that mindless bashing is the domain of >50 post people who try to fit in. And get repeatedly chastised for being anal.

Most of the people who have been on the boards for at least a year or so are much more moderate and intelligent. Except for a few oddities, but that's another story (Sorrow's getting the ban soon).

It also seems the lot of you can't possibly comprehend the meaning of the term "sequel to a non-mainstream hardcore RPG series" properly.

 

[Kyorisu]

I know I can and Beth seems to know what they're doing to push Fallout into the mainstream category. There's very little point these days in producing a title for a niche market short of being an indie production. After all development costs and expectations from the receiving public just keep on rising.

 

[Tagaziel]

I know I can and Beth seems to know what they're doing to push Fallout into the mainstream category. There's very little point these days in producing a title for a niche market short of being an indie production. After all development costs and expectations from the receiving public just keep on rising.

Mainstream doesn't have to mean "dumb down" and you know it.

 

[Narvi]

I'm amazed. You actually like the screenshots. Bethesda must be doing something right!

It looks very pretty, tell you the truth. I'm glad they didn't go for the STALKER DARK model.

 

[Kyorisu]

I know I didn't say that. I know very little about the title. Otherwise yes I would say mainstream would involve quite a lot of dumbing down. Surely you can't seriously expect the majority of consumers to be smart individuals who enjoy a product with depth? The only solution I can think of is to cater to both kinds of player at once, it's been done before. Have the depth there for those that want it and the "click boom" for everyone else.

 

[Warbie]

Mainstream doesn't have to mean "dumb down" and you know it.

But it does mean accessible, which doesn't always mean dumbed down.

Everything we've seen of Falout 3 looks pretty decent. Does it really matter if they take some liberties with lore? See it as a dfferent interpretation if you like, or just don't be invested enough to care in the first place

 

[Gargantou]

Uh, no. That's an idiot's claim we/I repeatedly disproved.



If you would actually read the forums, you would notice that mindless bashing is the domain of >50 post people who try to fit in. And get repeatedly chastised for being anal.

Most of the people who have been on the boards for at least a year or so are much more moderate and intelligent. Except for a few oddities, but that's another story (Sorrow's getting the ban soon).

It also seems the lot of you can't possibly comprehend the meaning of the term "sequel to a non-mainstream hardcore RPG series" properly.

You have obviously not seen my posts where I bash Oblivion because of how thoroughly it shits over ES lore established in Daggerfall and Morrowind(And Morrowind exp. packs).

But I do admit that I did a stupid generalization, my apologies.

 

[Tagaziel]

I know I didn't say that. I know very little about the title. Otherwise yes I would say mainstream would involve quite a lot of dumbing down. Surely you can't seriously expect the majority of consumers to be smart individuals who enjoy a product with depth? The only solution I can think of is to cater to both kinds of player at once, it's been done before. Have the depth there for those that want it and the "click boom" for everyone else.

Which is all I ask.

But it does mean accessible, which doesn't always mean dumbed down.

Fallout was accessible. Dude, I was eight or so and still didn't understand English perfectly, and had no problems finishing it. I still remember my first char... ah, the memories.

Does it really matter if they take some liberties with lore?

Does it really matter if the G-Man turns out to be a rabid cosmic bunny?

But I do admit that I did a stupid generalization, my apologies.

You know I can't stay mad at you, butt-baby. <3

 

[Kyorisu]

Which is all I ask.

Well I have no problems waiting to find out how they've gone about things. However I look at the it I don't see them making any crucial design changes no matter how many people yell at them.

 

[Asknoone]

I don't think “dumbing down” is necessarily a bad thing.

 

[Tagaziel]

Don't quote me, but I almost certainly remember seeing a thread or where some disgruntled moderator-type person made a huge post that insulted everyone who had any hope for the game whatsoever. It was something along the lines of "anyone who thinks that Bethesda is capable of making quality entertainment software is absolutely wrong. They are a shit developer and produce shit products - anyone who believes otherwise is an inbred dredge of a human and should be killed."

That was Roshambo, an ex-admin (he left because he thought we were too "soft") and long-time RPG developer.

I don't think “dumbing down” is necessarily a bad thing.

Yes, yes, I know you like games that solely consist of pressing a big button named "WIN THE GAME".

 

[Asknoone]

Actually it's all about todays market. Games need to be more accessible – especially for the average gamer, arguably the most important person buying your game. You'd be very, very surprised by how few people make it through to the end of the game.

 

[Tagaziel]

Actually it's all about todays market. Games need to be more accessible ? especially for the average gamer, arguably the most important person buying your game. You'd be very, very surprised by how few people make it through to the end of the game.

Which doesn't mean games should be dumbed down.

 

[Asknoone]

Games should be pick up and play and accessible. This isn't “dumbed down”.

 

[Deleted member 56031]

Yeah I agree with samon on that one

 

[Tagaziel]

Games should be pick up and play and accessible. This isn't ?dumbed down?.

So? You said it yourself that "dumbing down isn't necessarily bad". Acessibility doesn't mean it should be dumbed down a'la Bioshock.

Fallout was and is accessible. Character creation is an integral (and fun) part of the game.

 

[KagePrototype]

Yes, yes, I know you like games that solely consist of pressing a big button named "WIN THE GAME".

huurf duurf

Fallout was and is accessible. Character creation is an integral (and fun) part of the game.

It's definately not accessible by today's standards; I bet if you sat down an average gamer at Fallout today and told 'em to let rip, they'd just get frustrated with the UI or the horrible rat cave or the random world map encounters or the tedious turn-based combat. You need to look past quite a few annoyances to appreciate what Fallout does so endearingly.

 

[Asknoone]

It's definately not accessible by today's standards; I bet if you sat down an average gamer at Fallout today and told 'em to let rip, they'd just get frustrated with the UI or the horrible rat cave or the random world map encounters or the tedious turn-based combat. You need to look past quite a few annoyances to appreciate what Fallout does so endearingly.

Agreed. A very, very small minority would bother seeing it through the first level, nevermind the end.

 

[Tagaziel]

It's definately not accessible by today's standards; I bet if you sat down an average gamer at Fallout today and told 'em to let rip, they'd just get frustrated with the UI or the horrible rat cave or the random world map encounters or the tedious turn-based combat. You need to look past quite a few annoyances to appreciate what Fallout does so endearingly.

So basically rip out important gameplay mechanics (random encounters and turn based combat)? The latter isn't even tedious, as long as you don't try to get into massive battles, like hitting a random townsman intentionally or picking a fight in the Cathedral or the Mariposa.

Real time combat isn't the answer. Never was, never will be.

 

[Warbie]

I think you're a little blinkered concerning Fallout's deficiencies. It was a great game, but never something i'd describe as accessible, and as pc as pc games get - which is why it was cool. A faithful reinvention would be awesome, but it would have to improve on the original in more than a few areas for it pass scrutiny today.

 

[Sulkdodds]

Dogmeat <3

 

[Tagaziel]

I think you're a little blinkered concerning Fallout's deficiencies. It was a great game, but never something i'd describe as accessible, and as pc as pc games get - which is why it was cool. A faithful reinvention would be awesome, but it would have to improve on the original in more than a few areas for it pass scrutiny today.

In which ways was Fallout inaccessible?

 

[Warbie]

Turnbased is enough to put hordes of people off all by itself.

 

[Asknoone]

And when you're trying to appeal to the mass market that is, quite simply, an absolute no go. You can't appeal to a very small minority of gamers who want turn-based combat and to hell with real time combat. It isn't doable.

Games have to be pick up and play; everyone should be able to play from start to finish and find the game accessible and accommodating. By todays standards Fallout is far from accessible. You can have depth to your game – it just doesn't need to come in the form of complex interfaces and tedious combat. As a developer you're appealing to a far broader audience now and that does have to be taken into account.

 

[Tagaziel]

And when you're trying to appeal to the mass market that is, quite simply, an absolute no go. You can't appeal to a very small minority of gamers who want turn-based combat and to hell with real time combat. It isn't doable.

Turn based combat can easily be done in an accessible and easy way. It's a myth that only real-time sells.

Real time combat is also a devolution, as it doesn't allow for any complex situations or AI intricacies. The more enemies you have on screen, the less processing power is allocated to each single one.

Games have to be pick up and play; everyone should be able to play from start to finish and find the game accessible and accommodating. By todays standards Fallout is far from accessible. You can have depth to your game ? it just doesn't need to come in the form of complex interfaces and tedious combat.

So all games should take the path of BioShock and become easy, borderline retarded shootfests?