The Fallout 3 Thread Of Exploding Teddy Bears
 

From Bethesda, the creators of Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. Here's a hands on preview from IGN:

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/888/888731p1.html

Looks and sounds pretty sweet, if not a little repetitive.

Can't wait

I wish they stuck with the old isometric view :(

+1

I'm still nervous. Doubly so because it's being released for consoles.

Any game that allows me to use a slingshot named the Fat Man to launch a mini-nuke is OK in my book.

Me too. I prefer the old version that Black Isle was producing before they went out of business.

"Van Buren" (codename for Black Isle's Fallout 3) would have kicked major ass. Bethesda's "Oblivion with guns" pales in comparison. I miss Black Isle. :(

Youtube video of Van Buren:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/1uuDKrY7eW0&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/1uuDKrY7eW0&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

I really like the concept of the game, in that your actions actually have a tangible effect on the outcome of the game. It will be interesting to see if is anything more than superficial. It's surprising that so many RPG's still have so little input from the player on the games storyline, I would love to see Fallout 3 succeed in that regard.

http://fallout3.files.wordpress.com/.../fallout15.jpg


:thumbsup: Dog Meat :D

The E3 live demo sold me on this one. Unless the early reviews and word of mouth are terrible (which I can't imagine), I'll pick it up.

I watched the demo on the Microsoft E3 announcement and the G4 special and it looked very impressive.

It looks really impressive.

I had already ordered the super deluxe limited edition from amazon ($120) a couple of months ago.

XBL Dash has the trailer...looks sweet to me.

They also have a Too Human demo (controls SUCK!!), and a new RE:5-Hate Crimes trailer.

Hopefully they'll have a demo at the Comic-Con.

not too sure I'm going to like the FPS aspect of it.

According to the E3 Dev walkthrough vid you can switch between first person and 3rd person. They also demonstrate the aimed shot pretty well but I'm still wondering exactly how the action points are utilized - since you clearly see a bar for them in the bottom right of the screen. I think they might let you queue moves and attacks like in KOTOR. I just hope they have an option for full turn-based pause playing when entering combat (granted the KOTOR variation wasn't too bad). It was a little disappointing not to see any real character interaction conversation options or the trade inventory, but the PiPBoy update looks pretty true to form.

The more I read and the more game footage I watch, the more I realize Bethesda perfectly captured the art direction of the game and threw out the gameplay that made the game Fallout. I have no desire to play an Oblivion FPS. I think I'll be taking a pass on it. :(

What I wouldn't give for another good isometric turn-based RPG.

Me too. Unfortunately, I think the days of the isometric turn-based games are gone. Like the old graphic adventure games such as the SCUMM games, nobody wants strategic turn-based games anymore so no company makes them anymore. Today's gamers just want the video game equivalent of the hundred million dollar Hollywood summer action movie. -ohbfrank-

Its kind of ironic that the people who will most likely be most pleased with Bethesda's Fallout 3 will be the newbies that haven't even played the previous games..... Ignorance is bliss.

To be honest, I'm not going to throw the baby out with the bathwater just yet. I can see some of your reasons for pessimism, but I think there's still plenty of hope for a few reasons:

1. This is E3. It's all about making your game stand out among everything else - which sadly enough does mean focusing on the exploding heads and body parts. I mean, it's not as though most folks are going to be carrying around that combo of weapons from the get-go (it might not even be possible to carry them all in-game depending on individual weight limits). Sneaking around or carrying on a conversation doesn't make as good of a play demo at a convention like this. Although they didn't show nearly as much as I would have liked to see, there were obvious elements that showed through - for instance the aimed shot targeting still has it broken down by probability of successful hit (although that actual hit with the rocket launcher with a 0% probability of hit looked a little iffy).

2. This is Bethesda. I'll grant you that they're not Black Isle (although I think they originally incorporated some refugees), and I haven't been able to get as much into Oblivion myself (mostly through not devoting much time to it) - but I can't fault them in general for the masterpieces that were Morrowind, KOTOR, and Jade Empire - each of which sucked up huge chunks of my time while providing a thoroughly enjoyable experience. It may not be able to match the originals, but 11 years after the first one (10 after the sequel) I think we're starting to approach the nostalgia factor in which nothing can ever meet our expectations.

At this point, even given the lack of a complete concrete demonstration, I'm definitely on board for another reimagining of a well-fleshed out universe. I think we can also allow some flexibility in that we're actually on the East coast this time and we can hopefully get some different environmental backdrops to the purely traditional (and slightly overused) nuclear desert wasteland - although I wouldn't mind seeing some nuclear winter options either (did Tactics ever include that in any scenarios? I can't even remember now).

KOTOR and Jade Empire = Bioware, not Bethesda.

Even in the storyline Bethesda is getting all crappy. The BoS as knights, the Enclave on the east coast (!), supermutants that don't talk. Ugh ugh ugh.

Most of the Black Isle refugees started a new company: Obsidian.

Ok, maybe I'm missing some things since I generally forgo virtually all previews (aside from Live trailers) unless they're forced upon me or I actually feel like looking them up.

How is BoS being portrayed as "knights" differently now than in F2? - they had a military order, "brother maxwell", chivalry code thing going back then as well.

Now one thing I'm trying (unsuccessfully) to remember is whether or not we were ever getting an actual date setting for the original games since the dev mentioned that this is something around 2272 or so for the current setting. earlier or later than the first 2 games? I don't see a real issue with having the Enclave on the east coast since they are remnants of the gov't - but it really depends how much they try and tie things together.

There's just so much potential for variance on both sides of the country - the same organizations could arise and then branch fairly early - the names would probably stay the same but a lot of other things could change with different leadership. F: tactics addressed some of that with the branching story in the midwest compared to the west coast.

It all probably sounds overly apologetic - especially if there's more to see than what's downloadable on XBL, but I really can't see too much to stress out about at the moment. You're right about me messing up the company names though.

The hundred + hours of gameplay thing is a real draw for me (I spent a month plus just on morrowind with a single character) - and I think that the fallout style of gameplay is much more of a draw for character experimentation (heavy weapons vs. sniping vs charisma vs brawling) than the magic vs arrows vs melee in the Elder Scrolls series - particularly since it looks much easier to switch on the fly.

The BoS was a military organization that primarily wanted to preserve technology. They were never demonstrated to have any interest in running around the wastes saving people.

It's another Fallout game, and that's enough for me. I liked Tactics, and BoS.

That's like saying Superman 4 is another Superman movie, and that's good enough or saying that Batman & Robin is another Batman movie, and that's good enough.

Sure they are new entries into the franchise, but the most important thing is are they actually good and faithful to the previous entries.

From everything I am seeing, Fallout 3 has Bat-nipples.


You liked BoS, as in the previous console bastardization? That game had more in common with Gauntlet (old game from the 80s) than Fallout. It bastardized the series as much as the console Baldur's Gate games did. Those games should be wiped off the face of the earth (or at least buried in New Mexico with the ET 2600 cartridges).

It's another Oblivion-type game by the makers of Oblivion, and that's more than enough for me...

Makers of KOTOR 2 and NWN 2.

But it is not supposed to be an Oblivion-type game. It is supposed to be a Fallout game.

Fallout is not supposed to be a first person shooter type of game where you wander around aimlessly going through a thousand different dungeons that all look the same and going to a bunch of different towns where everyone has the same face and voice actor.

That's the Elder Scrolls, but it is not Fallout. They may as well call the game "Elder Scrolls V: We Put Fallout In The Subtitle Just To Increase Sales Even Though The Game Has Little To Nothing To Do With Fallout."


Yeah, and I wish they would resurrect the "Van Buren" project and release it as The Real Fallout 3. :)

Interplay most likely still owns what remains of the Van Buren project though, so that probably won't happen.

I don't think it's worth it to embed these vids, but they're worth watching if you've got the time.

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/36162.html -- director does mention the enclave being the shadow gov't here. Makes it sound a bit more like post-Fallout 2 and they've moved back East (not too many clues though). Apparently there's a level cap at 20.

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/37141.html - the other video I referred to earlier - heavy on combat, low on other demos.

I don't care about what it's supposed to be - I care about what it is. If it was just like the other Fallout games, it wouldn't even be on my radar as I didn't care much for the one I played. But I sure loved the shit out of Morrowind and Oblivion.

Fallout 1 and 2 are huge piles of crap - screw that stupid isometric headache inducing perspective - text for life.

An isometric view gives you headaches? If anything, typically the first person perspective (or over the shoulder 3rd person in this case) are the ones that cause people issues.

A few more notes from the interview vid I posted above.

1. Regardless of charisma/perks, you're limited to one companion (not counting dog). Although that also probably doesn't take into account "mysterious stranger" perk which was mentioned. You can also give companion ammo, armor, weapons, etc. Hopefully they have a proper trade interface this time - the partner trade/equip function was always pretty broke in the other games.

2. Main quest only should take around 20 hours - about 100 hours gameplay for hitting everything else.

3. Action points are definitely included - you can queue attacks on more than one enemy before combat actually starts. I don't think you can actually run and gun it like a real FPS unless I'm missing something.

I stand by what I said earlier about the nostalgia factor overcoming all else. Yes, they're putting the name on it and with it comes expectations, but it's never going to live up to everything in the original (heck, I printed up the entire fan-made PnP RPG back in the day but never had anyone to play with) - although the wasteland mod for HL was pretty fun back in the day ;p

It's still been 10 years since the release of the last real sequel if you don't want to count tactics and I'm assuming you don't. I have my CDs and I won't be dumping them anytime soon - I can pop them in anytime I want to play through again - but that won't stop me from enjoying a new iteration of an old favorite (even if it isn't byte for byte the same game).

Which Fallout did you play? There are two "official" Fallout games and two spin-off games.

Fallout 1 and 2 were the official games and they were released on PC only in '97 and '98 respectively.

Fallout Tactics was a spin-off that was released on PC only in '01. It was a strategy game instead of an RPG like the previous games.

Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel was the console game released on PS2 and Xbox in '04. It had basically nothing to do with the previous games. This game was a pure dungeon crawl like the old Gauntlet game. It was a Fallout game in name only.

If the Fallout game you played was one of the latter two, I can understand why you might not have liked it. Tactics had very mixed reviews, some loved it and others despised it. BoS was hated by most everyone (at least the hardcore Fallout audience). Now, if you played Fallout 1 and 2, and didn't like them, then there is something wrong....

Its a 2D game? Damn those graphics suck. We need HDR bloom lighting and volumetric clouds and other techy soundy crap or else the game sucks. :sarcasm:

I always confuse fallout with Wastelands. :(

http://www.atomicgamer.com/article.php?id=594

I did come across this preview while waiting to download the patches for Tactics just now (feel the need to play that one again). A few more explanations on different things.

It was Fallout 1 on the PC. It was well-made and all, I just don't care for that style of gameplay - it felt too much like a point&click adventure (which I don't like), only with a lot of resource management (which I also don't like).

Well, Fallout is the spiritual successor to Wasteland. Both games were made by Interplay. Technically, Fallout was made by Black Isle, but Black Isle was a division of Interplay specifically for making crpgs.

I bet you didn't like Thief Deadly Shadows or Dues Ex Invisble War, either. I did, and while I do want the game to be good, it doesn't have to blow me out of the water.

What are you seeing that makes you fear the game will suck?