An hypothetical question for recent Fallout fans

[Sizzle Montyjing]

clip 1: My brain hurts. Am i having a seizure?
clip 2: Meh.
So, i'd be pretty dissapointed with this, especially knowing what bethesda can do.

 

[clamps]

This was the first fallout game I played and I was so close to never playing a fallout game again kind of wish I did not....

 

[JamesStone]

If you mention again that the non-cannonical piece of shit over there ever existed, I swear I will rip you in half.

Oh, and another thing: NO, YOU WEREN´T CLOSED TO ACHIEVE UTOPIA YOU MORON! (first video)
THERE WAS THE "NEW PLAGUE", A GIGANTIC RESOURCE WAR, RIOTS ALL OVER THE USA, CIVILIAN DEATH COUNTS REACHING MILIONS, THANKS TO THE PLAGUE AND THE MOTHERFUCKING SOLDIERS AND SUPER SECRET VAULT-TEC/ENCLAVE PROJECTS STEALING THE FUNDS THAT SHOULD HAVE GONE TO HELPING PEOPLE, OR AT LEAST CREATING HELPFUL VAULTS. HOW IS THAT ALMOST PERFECT?!
Many years of rage were compressed in that sentence. Thanks @Nulmas!

 

[TCPirate]

I'm just going to pretend I didn't see that.
I first played the fallout series when I got Fallout 3 (if this was 4chan i'd be called a newfag) after loving that game, I played the Fallout and Fallout 2 and adored them and realised that Fallout 3 was terrible in comparison. Then Fallout New Vegas came out and I was highly disappointed.

 

[GeneWard]

I would probably react something like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NMnnMRWJ-0 Only imagine it's in Bethesda HQ.

 

[SageRuffin]

I'm a late bloomer, having just gotten into the series with 3. But after seeing that, I'll pass.

 

[Hybridwolf]

Odd that my Captacha is alive and kicking, when that game was one of the reasons Fallout died. And the game itself? Never played it, never will, and although I will acknowledge it's exsistance, it's only because we need to learn from it. So no, don't kill it with fire, just keep it hanging on the walls at Bethesda HQ to remind them not to balls up that badly.

 

[General BrEeZy]

never heard of it but i suppose i should be grateful for that?
ok yeah, that'd apparently be bad.
good thing thats just hypothetical!!

 

[PrototypeC]

Why... why would you... bring this up again?! Dammit! I had almost finished forgetting it!!

Do NOT bring this up again. Not funny, Nulmas.

 

[Cowabungaa]

First and second question: I think that games that are specifically made for 1st should be kept in first person, since blending multiple camera angles rarely works. The third person mode in Fallout 3, NV and Oblivion were all just very bad, in my opinion at least. Same goes with the Hitman games and their 1st person modes. This is again, however strictly a matter of opinion, like pretty much everything we are talking about in this conversation. Why I think Isometric can create a different experience to attaching the camera to the characters face or by his shoulder, is that I feel it's a completely different camera-style. I think controlling multiple characters in this mode is easier. Seeing behind corners, covers etc. creates the feeling of a strategy game. This is why I think 3d isn't the natural afterlife for isometric. I find isometric viewpoints to be a highly strategical way of looking at things. This is why I think it works for strategy games and for click-n-go RPG's. And I never said anything about restricting the isometric angle neither. I just said that more games should consider this as a valid camera-angle for tactical combat. A game that's designed to play from first or 3rd person probably wont have a well designed isometric view. I am talking about games that would be designed to be played on isometric. DA:O being on of them, at least in my opinion, since I can't obviously know what the designers were thinking. I think a big part of the aesthetics of Jagged Alliance was the camera. I wouldn't recognize a JA-game where it would be played in first person. Same with Planescape: Torment and Baldurs Gate.

Holy epic wall of text Batman!

*ahem*

Anyway, you're definitely right about third person and first person. Bethesda's animations are pretty dire, and once I found out how my char looked in third person I switched back and never looked back again.

As for the rest, sure, I can see why an isometric viewpoint could be nice for tactics, as someone who played plenty of isometric games myself. It's also true that back in the ol' days isometric was more than just a camara angle. Planescape's hand-drawn 2D art can't simply be poofed into 3D. That game really represents the pinnacle of 2D art design, together with Legends of Mana which I still want to play, badly, and I haven't even touched the surface of that game...

Okay a compromise it is then; a third person game with combat designed to be viewed from an isometric perspective, but still has the ability to move the camara around any way you wish. That way we can have the most tactical battles possible and I can still roam the imposing streets of a destroyed Fallout-style city and gawk at the beautific, destroyed architecture. Full 3D brings about a sense of scale that isometric really lacks.

A good example of this would be Arcanum. What I wouldn't do to bask in the glory of all that gorgeous Victorian architecture with modern graphics. I'd still like my battles tactical, but that world deserves to be freed from the constraints of old-style isometric.

3rd question: When I was a kid I played more 2d games than I did isometric. I guess I just don't like genre-changing. Maybe I have a soft-spot for isometric view. Can't I like a viewpoint even if I wasn't into it as a kid? I personally think the style has charm of sorts. I don't really like when people automatically say 'it's the nostalgia' when a person likes something outdated or old. I have things I look through nostalgia-goggles, but I wouldn't say this camera-angle is one of them.

Nostalgia goes beyond liking this you liked as a kid. You just seem to prefer old technology over a new one. That's pretty nostalgic. *shrug* Not that a definition like this matters much. Nostalgia is only really bad when it's used to defend something that actually sucks just for the sake of it being like the old stuff. Sorta like Duke Nukem Forever.

4th question: Like I mentioned above, when multiple camera-angles are done in one game, the possibility of the developers thinking and making only one of them work properly is very high. I personally never played through Oblivion, F3 or F:NV in 3rd person or in isometric view, mainly because it didn't really work that well. I think the industry has enough space for 3D does not equal first person. First and third person are indeed very hard to combine well. Third and isometric are less hard, mainly because isometric is third person, it's just a camara angle.

I am not strictly talking about fallout. I am just saddened to see isometric strategy and RPG-games disappear. Budget-wise alot of smaller companies and indie-developers could find alot of use out of using isometric view. With that said: I appreciated this conversation. I always like hearing the viewpoints (pun not intented) of other people. It is rare to have internet conversations that don't overflow into mindless trolling. This has been an interesting experience and very fun, but do feel free to continue giving me your points, if you feel like you have more of them to give. I would be more than happy to hear them. Conversation Appreciated Highly. ^_^

Good to hear. Mind you, I don't hate isometric viewpoints, especially not in older games. It's just that I sometimes imagine the fantastic worlds those RPG's brought us. Planescape for example... The potential that lies in it, good heavens... The idea of stepping outside of the Mortuary for the first time, seeing that huge building rise above you, seeing the city sprawling, Dustmen scurrying off into little alleyways, seeing the city shift in real time all around you. The possibilities are endless!

That is not to say that those old games don't deliver their own powerful experience. Planescape is still beautifully designed. But what I could do with those game worlds if I had the tools and skills...my oh my...

And I guess that you're right about the indy thing. For smaller teams it's still a worthwhile area to explore. As long as the art direction is stellar.

 

[MrGalactus]

yup, this was Interplay's idea of a Console Fallout. I don't know why they think they'd have to break cannon and make a brainless shooter rather than a good old fashioned Fallout RPG, but there we are. This is what Interplay thinks of you, consolers!

 

[putowtin]

wow... did that suck!

 

[OrenjiJusu]

I joined the fallout fandom as fallout 3 was announced i managed to badger my parents into getting 1 and 2 (because im the kinda person who loves knowing the backstory). Played tactics which is a lil bit of a departure from the norm. Heard about BOS, took a small glace through internet materail relating to it and immedietly blanked the bugger.

In short, Thanks for reminding me that this exists. I needed another reason to mindlessly slaughter innocents.

 

[dancinginfernal]

What happened to pretending that never happened?

OT: I'd cry (on the inside). I mean, that's a ridiculously drastically leap in themes from one game to the next.

Spin-off or no, that does not have any resemblance to the Fallout games, early games or recent.

 

[Sentient6]

I assume the point of this thread is a (rather clever) jab at the fact that F3 turned the franchise upside down and pissed off a lot of the original game's fans, and a "how would YOU like it" kind of question towards F3/NV fans....

Anyway, I see that point, but I don't really buy it. If you ARE going to resurrect a popular franchise that's been largely dead for some time, then why not take it into a different direction that might make it stand out and be unique? It sure as hell beats making a glorified tribute to the original, trying to please the fans and ultimately failing because the game you just made is utterly mediocre (coincidentally, this is why I like what R* are doing with Max Payne 3)..

I don't really get the whole cult-like obsession with old titles that were good when they were released. There's a big hint in that sentence - they were good, when they were released. I'm really glad F3 decided to completely revamp the series.
I played Fallout 3 before I played the original, but I got the Fallout Collection (F1, F2 and Tactics, iirc) afterwards. And honestly - I didn't really care for it. F3 was just better.

And the fact that it stool aside from the source material was a large part of it. It was its own game. This is also why I disliked NV - it felt like F3, only redressed in a setting that would be closely connected to the original game (and heavily garnished with lots of F3 mods). Kinda cheapened the game for me.

 

[someonehairy-ish]

What the fuck? That was not a trailer for a fallout game I just saw.

Also I like metal but really? Not a very good song, even if it did make any sense at all in Fallout.

 

[Inkidu]

I've just realized that nowadays there are plenty of new Fallout fans that may have not been exposed to a certain game in the franchise. Back when it originally came out (hell, even when it was announced) the game caused a bit of an "interesting" reaction.

So, here's the scenario:

Imagine that Bethesda announces that they would be postponing the development of Fallout 4. In that time, they would be developing a spin-off of the series that was an action dungeon crawler.

And then they hit you with these:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tz4i_iXNP-E (trailer)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifnMjqdm4QE (video)

For the sake of the argument, ignore the old graphics. Just pretend they're current gen.

So, what would your response to this be like?

While even as a recent fan I'm aware of the absolute hate for "that game" if anyone could pull it off it would probably be Bethesda. Though it would probably look a lot more like 3 or NV than "that game". From what I gathered (and fan hate aside) I think that Bethesda handled Fallout 3 with a solid and appropriate amount of tact and skill. It might not be what Fallout fanboys wanted, but it was done with most of the world in mind (a fair amount of gripes I've heard are more technicalities and nit-pickery than anything.)

Would I play it. Maybe. It depends on whether or not Bethesda knows enough to keep the God-damned metal out of it.

 

[The Random One]

Man... and fans of the old games say Bethesda screwed it up. At least you can't say they weren't earnest.

 

[JordanMillward_1]

While acknowledging the... difficulties... of branding the game as Fallout, I found the video oddly appealing. The trailer not so much.

Same here. I actually quite liked the video.

 

[Nulmas]

Why... why would you... bring this up again?! Dammit! I had almost finished forgetting it!!

Do NOT bring this up again. Not funny, Nulmas.

Regarding the various posts about not bringing this up, I'm going to explain myself.

As I said before, I don't like skeletons in the closet.

And as another user mentioned, this game should be remembered as a lesson.


This game is probably the best example of a company going completely against its fans wishes. Most of the people reading this aren't probably aware of this, but the devs were even rude to the fans back then when they complained about this piece of crap.

Brotherhood of Steel was nothing more than a cash grabbing attempt to reach out to the console market (and they didn't even get that right).

Now, I never even mentioned this game back then, at the exception of discussing it privately with some friends. Why? Because there's no such thing as bad publicity.

But nowadays, hey, I think it should be mentioned every single time a developer tries to ignore its fans. Hell, you should tell the tale of Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel to little baby game developers when they go to bad so they don't repeat past mistakes.

So, summarizing: Yeah, we suffered with this indignity. Let's make it count for something!