Fallout 3/Oblivion Comparison

[DeadEye]

Originally Posted by Raine

I actually enjoy the idea that fallout will be recreated in a new 3d perspective. I've enjoyed fallout 1 and 2, A LOT, but I doubt that fallout can't be fallout without a traditional top-down view. Fallout wasn't just about the top down perspective, what made fallout was the entire universe. The post-apocalyptic atmosphere, the music, the violence, the fight for survival, the misery and the dark sense of humor. And I think that with today's technology, that universe can come to life even better than it did in fallout 1 or 2. And with the beauty of Oblivion, I can only imagine what Bethesda can do for fallout when we're another 1 or 2 years further along with the technology.

I totaly agree with you here, the atmosphere... i've never played a game ever again with this kind of "atmosphere"... the sound and the post-apc. surroundings had a greet feeling in it. and with the if it aint broke dont try to fix it thing theyve did a good fallout 2. I would love to see it in 3d like they've done WoW. Not the cartoony look. but the perspective and all... this could be a good thing.

by the way do you agree on some kind of coop mode, or some kind of death-match skirmish thing?? CoOp like in diablo style... and deathmatch somewhat like tactics?

[Monolith]

Originally Posted by Monolith

But before you think that I'm all against Beth's Fallout 3:
I'm not. I'm anticipating the game and I hope that it will be as much fun as Fallout 1 and 2 were and are.

I have to retract my words. After seeing what became of Oblivion I can't expect anything beyond a pile of crap. A watered down PA action adventure with excessively rendered sand corns.

[Xandax]

Originally Posted by Monolith

I have to retract my words. After seeing what became of Oblivion I can't expect anything beyond a pile of crap. A watered down PA action adventure with excessively rendered sand corns.

I must admit that my seed of doubt of whether Bethesda can lift this task of producing a Fallout game was planted with Morrowind

I don't care much about an isometric view vs. FP view - although I would personally prefere top down movable somewhat like NwN which could go down to 3rd person view - and I don't care about 2D or 3D graphics, because frankly all games are 3D now, even games as NwN and similar with top-downish view.
I am somewhat interested in combat style, because I'd hate a Fallout combat style as in Morrowind. It will be pretty difficult making Fallout combat possible in a FP view, and thus the S.P.E.C.I.A.L combat system would likely need to be rewamped, or perhaps even dropped. If Fallout becomes a twitch game, then most fans would be majorly disapointed and I fear the franchise would drown in the greyness of the FPS market.

What I do care about is the feel, atmosphere and gameplay of Fallout, which I'm not sure Bethesda can lift considering Daggerfall -> Morrowind both suffered from the same blandness, and from what I've read - so does Oblivion.
Graphics can be nice and pretty and help a game - but they do not make a game. What made Fallout fun was the athmosphere and gameplay and I'm not holding my breath that Bethesda can do it proberly considering their trackrecord. So I think making a completely new game which only holds minor relations to the Fallout-name and location is the result (Morrowind with Guns and Mutans instead of sword and cliffrazors).

I would almost rather have Fallout 3 wasn't made then it being destroyed..... but then again - I can only be pleasently suprised, but I could also win 1million in the lottery this wedensday.

[Foss]

Originally Posted by Raine

I actually enjoy the idea that fallout will be recreated in a new 3d perspective. I've enjoyed fallout 1 and 2, A LOT, but I doubt that fallout can't be fallout without a traditional top-down view. Fallout wasn't just about the top down perspective, what made fallout was the entire universe. The post-apocalyptic atmosphere, the music, the violence, the fight for survival, the misery and the dark sense of humor. And I think that with today's technology, that universe can come to life even better than it did in fallout 1 or 2. And with the beauty of Oblivion, I can only imagine what Bethesda can do for fallout when we're another 1 or 2 years further along with the technology.

I agree with you on that Fallout is very much the setting and atmosphere.
But, making a 3d version of Fallout, like Oblivion with 1st and 3rd person view you might have to make several changes in the original Fallout system design that I wouldn't really want.
A thing like the turn-based combat mode has always been a favorite of mine.
And that would be difficult to do with 1st or 3rd person as you wouldn't have the same overview of the area and situation.

A better view mode IMO, would be like NWN, where you can zoom in and out and turn the camera 360 degrees. Then you can still get close ups and perhaps even 1st person, but also the top-down view.

--------------------------------------------------

When I first heard that Bethesda was going to make Fallout 3, i was quite happy. I had played Morrowind, and was very positively surprissed about it.
But after Oblivion I am a bit unsure if they are able and willing to make a good Fallout game.

Some of the things that made Fallout great, other than the setting, was the Character creation system and the dialog.
I think the character creation system made a strong impact on your game, depending on how you made your character. Which would make your game full of choices and consequences.
And I think it was with the dialog it really came through.

Morrowind and Oblivion had basicly no dialog. NPCs were information booths and quest givers. And that might be a place where I can doubt Bethesda alittle.

Then also the fact that Oblivion was marketing as a next generation RPG and got alot of praise and has sold alot.
But to me, it was a big disspointment. Morrowind is still a better RPG IMO, and Oblivion is more like an action adventure game than an RPG.
They made Oblivion to simple and focused on alot cosmetic things instead of working on the RPG elements.
And I am affraid, simply because it was such a big success that they might try to do the same with Fallout 3.

[DesR85]

I don't mind that Bethseda is working on Fallout 3. Using the same engine from Oblivion sounds okay but at least they could improve the animation of main characters and NPCs from Oblivion.

The camera angle for Fallout 3 should be in 3rd person just like Fable: The Lost Chapters since I don't particularly like the top-down camera view used by most PC RPGs such as Neverwinter Nights, Baldur's Gate and others. I mean, come on., shouldn't you have a more dynamic view rather than looking from the sky? Also, the 3rd person RPGs for the PCs are very few and with Fallout 3 as a 3rd person RPG, it will add to the collection to this category.

As for the controls, I hope they use the W, A, S, D movement keys and the mouse for the 3rd person camera view. I don't particularly like using the mouse for movement/interact/attack. Gets kind of like a 'click' fest after a while.

And lastly, the combat had to be real-time to attract casual gamers and non-RPG players so that at least they have the incentive to try out the game instead of making the game very unfriendly to people who are new to the RPG genre.

[Xandax]

Originally Posted by DesR85

I don't mind that Bethseda is working on Fallout 3. Using the same engine from Oblivion sounds okay but at least they could improve the animation of main characters and NPCs from Oblivion.

The camera angle for Fallout 3 should be in 3rd person just like Fable: The Lost Chapters since I don't particularly like the top-down camera view used by most PC RPGs such as Neverwinter Nights, Baldur's Gate and others. I mean, come on., shouldn't you have a more dynamic view rather than looking from the sky? Also, the 3rd person RPGs for the PCs are very few and with Fallout 3 as a 3rd person RPG, it will add to the collection to this category.

As for the controls, I hope they use the W, A, S, D movement keys and the mouse for the 3rd person camera view. I don't particularly like using the mouse for movement/interact/attack. Gets kind of like a 'click' fest after a while.

And lastly, the combat had to be real-time to attract casual gamers and non-RPG players so that at least they have the incentive to try out the game instead of making the game very unfriendly to people who are new to the RPG genre.

In NwN you can zoom/rotate the camera into practically 3rd person view if you wanted. It isn't only a top-down birds eye view.
The advantage of a birds eye view is that when you have a party, you have better overview of the situation. You can't get the same overview of a situation in First Person view, and even third person view sometimes causes problems with angles. And Fable is an excellent example of this, where the view sometimes is obscured so you can't target the enemies but they can target you - no thanks. Give me a real view of the situation
Also I disagree with this "the game needs to be so easy" type thinking. It is a bad way of thinking, and it - in my view - springs form the console world and it is effecting gameplay and replay values by removing challenges other then adding 5 enemies instead of 3 and calling it difficult.

As for combat being real time, it would requier a major change of the Fallout method of combat and eleminate pretty much most tactical advantage of party members - if indeed a party is even present. Besides, I fail to see why turn based combat is more user-unfriendly then real time for new RPG players?
However, I do not doubt that the combat will be real time, although I don't think it'll go down well (with me at least). The combat system in Morrowind and Daggerfall was bad in my view. Sitting and swinging, no thanks, I just felt stupid doing so.

I know I'll not get a Fallout game which I'd enjoy, meaning it will not be a RPG because I frankly think the genre is on its deadbed with all these new RPG-"lite" which are more action then RP - the gamedevelopment has passed me and my kin by and now caters to the console generation with fast actionfilled and easy gameplay.



/signed grumpy old man

[DesR85]

Originally Posted by Xandax

In NwN you can zoom/rotate the camera into practically 3rd person view if you wanted. It isn't only a top-down birds eye view.
The advantage of a birds eye view is that when you have a party, you have better overview of the situation. You can't get the same overview of a situation in First Person view, and even third person view sometimes causes problems with angles. And Fable is an excellent example of this, where the view sometimes is obscured so you can't target the enemies but they can target you - no thanks. Give me a real view of the situation

In Fable, you can adjust the viewing angle to be further from your character but that's about it. It will give you a wider viewing angle but I agree with you that its still restrictive. Anyway, I hated first person RPGs since to me, the viewing angle is the most restrictive compared to other viewing angles like 3rd person or top-down.

Originally Posted by Xandax

Also I disagree with this "the game needs to be so easy" type thinking. It is a bad way of thinking, and it - in my view - springs form the console world and it is effecting gameplay and replay values by removing challenges other then adding 5 enemies instead of 3 and calling it difficult.

I agree with you. I don't mind if the gameplay is easy to grasp but I will be turned off if the game goes by this type of leveling system such as in Oblivion where you sneak around, your stealth level increase by each pace. Also, I wish that the AI in RPGs could be improved like making them be able to exploit weaknesses or try to flank you as an example.

Originally Posted by Xandax

As for combat being real time, it would requier a major change of the Fallout method of combat and eleminate pretty much most tactical advantage of party members - if indeed a party is even present. Besides, I fail to see why turn based combat is more user-unfriendly then real time for new RPG players?
However, I do not doubt that the combat will be real time, although I don't think it'll go down well (with me at least). The combat system in Morrowind and Daggerfall was bad in my view. Sitting and swinging, no thanks, I just felt stupid doing so.

I knew I should've edited my previous post. I meant to say that both turn-based and real-time are user-friendly just as long as the gameplay is easy to grasp. The reason why I liked real-time is because you have more control over your character, how he/she moves and fights. The bad thing is that you don't need much thinking just to defeat an enemy. Just keep hacking and that's it. Will also get repetitive overtime.

Originally Posted by Xandax

/signed grumpy old man

Since when were you ever grumpy? You did mention some very good and important points in your statement after all.

[Xandax]

Originally Posted by DesR85

<snip>
Since when were you ever grumpy? You did mention some very good and important points in your statement after all.

I'm a grumpy old man because I dislike the direction RPGs and games in genral have taken over the last couple of years to easy fast paced action which requier the brainpower of wetblankets, which seems to be the way the "youth" want games.
And that's what I fear will happen to Fallout 3 as well given Bethesda's trackrecord.

[Malta Soron]

Well, at least this 'youth' agrees with you

[ruscavo]

I thought the system employed by KOTOR and KOTOR2 worked reasonable well from a third person perspective. With regards to combat and party management. Gave you the option of micro managing of your teams actions or just letting them get down to it. Only had to deal with two at a time though.

Like the idea of being able to chose, because I personally prefer the isometric view but I know its not always as accessable. Unfortunately we have to realise that most companies are not making games for us anymore, just to ship as many units as humanly possible before they bring out another.

Cynical? I know.

[Locutus]

Originally Posted by Foss

Then also the fact that Oblivion was marketing as a next generation RPG and got alot of praise and has sold alot.
But to me, it was a big disspointment. Morrowind is still a better RPG IMO, and Oblivion is more like an action adventure game than an RPG.
They made Oblivion to simple and focused on alot cosmetic things instead of working on the RPG elements.
And I am affraid, simply because it was such a big success that they might try to do the same with Fallout 3.

totally agree.
as a matter of fact,this is the only thing that i fear of.i wouldnt mind any cosmetic facelifts,inevitable drastic changes in controls, view, NPC interraction, so on...as long as its complex ("complex" is a rather non-complex word when describing Fallout quest-char system).
As seen from various interviews, Bethesda seems to have a new policy on nextgen games: it considers old concepts obsolete, and not-so-attractive to the younger generation of gamers (automatically making us "older" gamers even more old,which comes as an insult on certain levels...but thats not the issue here,eh).
As i played Oblivion, the future of F3 (which was promising to me, being put in the hands of this respected firm) suddenly became abit grim.

PS This aint just a simple lament. The past has shown this "mtv" concept to overwhelm the immortal adventure genre the same way.

[Kipi]

Originally Posted by Xandax

As for combat being real time, it would requier a major change of the Fallout method of combat and eleminate pretty much most tactical advantage of party members - if indeed a party is even present. Besides, I fail to see why turn based combat is more user-unfriendly then real time for new RPG players?

Agree you here. Turn based combat is FAR more newbe friendly, because it allows new players to actually study the situation, study manuals to how perform different actions and so on. And also, as mentioned here few times, it will totally ruin the S.P.E.C.I.A.L system, and thus it must be replaced. Probably it will turn out to be more like Deus Ex than Fallout...

I also fear that the developers are going to concentrate too much to how the game look like rather than the game itself. This is sad fact I have noticed in many todays games, not only in RPGs but in other games too. This is also why I liked the old way of Fallouts, since there wasn't much room for mind blowing graphics, and thus teh developers were "forced" to concentrate on the game itself.

I know I'll not get a Fallout game which I'd enjoy, meaning it will not be a RPG because I frankly think the genre is on its deadbed with all these new RPG-"lite" which are more action then RP - the gamedevelopment has passed me and my kin by and now caters to the console generation with fast actionfilled and easy gameplay.

Amen, brother!

[Masa]

I'm not a big fan of 3d and I think that bethesda can't do a fallout. Fallout 3 should have been made 2 years ago as Black Isle had it almost finished. If fallout 3 is going to be 1st person I will be more shocked than from the fallout tactics. I really liked the isometric view... I hope they're not going to make another oblivion.

[Kipi]

Originally Posted by Masa

I'm not a big fan of 3d and I think that bethesda can't do a fallout. Fallout 3 should have been made 2 years ago as Black Isle had it almost finished. If fallout 3 is going to be 1st person I will be more shocked than from the fallout tactics. I really liked the isometric view... I hope they're not going to make another oblivion.

One question:
WHere do you base that Fallout 3, made by BlackIsle, was almost finished?
As far as I know, it was somewhat ready, but not nearly almost finished...

[Masa]

Well from Gamespot interview

GS: Will Bethesda's Fallout 3 retain any elements of the "Van Buren" game that was in development at Black Isle Studios? Reports are that it was nearly complete.

TH: No, we're going to start fresh.

Ok maybe not almost finished but great deal of the work had been done still.

GB: At the time of the studios' closure, how much of Fallout 3 had been completed? How much more development time do you feel the title needed before it could have been considered "complete"?

John: The engine was about 95% done. You could create characters, use skills, perform both ranged and melee combat, save/load games, and travel across maps. We had a tutorial level done that would let you do all of the above. All areas but one had been designed. About 75% of the dialogs were done and at least 50% of the maps. We had character models and monster models.

If Interplay had supported us as they had promised and given us needed resources from other divisions we would have finished the game on time. Possibly even ahead of schedule.

And Yes I'm still bitter about Interplay's decicion to choose console over PC.