Arcanum graphics...

This really has done wonders for the registration here...

Anyhoo... To repeat what others have said, I don't much like the idea of 3d, for no apparent reason, and I like turnbased combat

Unfortunately I think sales figures would suggest that everyone who doesn't use forums, all like real time...

 

Hmm, sales figures suggest everyone likes real-time. I wonder how many potential serious Fallout customers would prefer real-time in the next Fallout game. Jumping immediately to that kind of conclusion to me would be about like someone saying, "Hmm, people like Fritos, but more people like chocolate. Hey, I've got the answer! Chocolate covered Fritos! It'll be a huge hit!" Would you eat them?

 

Sounds tastey!

 

Hmmm...well, since this is now the TORN thread: :wink:
1) TORN is still pretty sketchy- I'm reserving judgement for one reason, and one reason only: Black Isle's never let me down. Argue if you will (oh, and you will)- they changed the genre, and in to a lesser degree the industry.
2) Competition is good for the whole industry (well, for users, anyway- it's good for companies, too, if you happen to be the best). Hell, look what just happened to the registered users stats!
3) Feargus, next time you post, don't do it right after I log off, huh? Geez. I feel all left out and stuff.

 

Well, I welcome you to try it out, then. Who knows, maybe you'll love it after all. Personally, when I want Fritos, I'll eat Fritos. When I want chocolate, I'll eat chocolate. I'll let the same people who buy Vienna sausages by the crate try the unholy combination of the two.

 

Yum! Unholy Combination!

_________________
Wojit - He likes rice.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Wojit on 2001-05-14 02:01 ]</font>

 

I think that the major fault for all the CRPG developers, wether they are creation TORN, or Fallout 3 (if any :smile: , is everyone's attempt to use 3D graphics. I think that the CLASSICAL things should remain unchanged. Fallout can never be 3D and all the attempts to produce its clones (if you like it or not - ARCANUM is eventually a Fallout clone...) will fail. The amount of this game fans will reduce significantly, if the creators would be "clever" enough to change the graphical implementation of the game completely.

 

Hey, man, that's not cool. My sister once ate a crate and nearly died. Take it back!

 

*take*

 

Thanks. You're nice. I'm going to stop this so we don't get shot.

 

Yipes, big thread. First of all, I'd like to make a humble request for people not to speak for "Fallout fans". I'm a Fallout fan, and I'm quite able to form and express my own opinions. Thank you.

To everyone complaining about the move to 3D:

You know Torment? All those purdy graphics? 3D. You know Arcanum? All the characters and objects? 3D. The big change is having it rendered in real time, and this allows you to do a whole lot of cool things that are impractical in 2D games. In Arcanum, every character has to be modelled and rendered with every possible combination of weapons, shields, armour, etc. performing every possible action, walking, running, talking, whatever. I believe this is why we're not seeing female versions of some of the races in Arcanum - too much work. Taking the real time 3D route means stuff like this can be done on the fly. You have your character model, and a collection of weapon and shield models which can be combined. Different armours can to an extent be simulated with different skins on the models. Using skeletal animation means you don't need separate animations for each action. The end effect is something that takes up less storage space and is easier to develop and implement. Sounds good to me.

Putting a game in 3D doesn't mean it is suddenly going to turn into a first person shooter, either. You can still have the same isometric fixed camera perspective if you want. And comments like "EVERY 3d game is either an actiony piece of crap (a la quake) or a stupid Tomb Raider clone." just beg not to be taken seriously. From adventure games to real time strategy to rpgs, the trend is towards 3D.

Fallout, to me, was all about the atmosphere, and the responsiveness (responsivity? responsibility?) of the game world. Getting so hung up about the move to 3D seems to me to be missing the point. What hooks me in and keeps me there is what is below the surface. And isn't that how this topic got started in the first place?

-Borghal

<bah, humbug. edited for typos>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Borghal on 2001-05-14 06:37 ]</font>

 

I don't think the graphics aren't too bad in arcanum.
Although in one thing i was disappointed, when i wanted to wear a certain helmet in the demo, i didn't see any change in my avatar.
I think the avatar should be more customizable.

 

Borghal is right. you people who bitch and moan about fallout 3 using a 3d engine are ignorant little schmucks. so shut up. fallout 3 will proabably have a 3d engine but it wil still work the same as the previous games, just look better. think diablo 2 with all the detail in your character and such, and you get beauty.

as for all you guys ripping on feargus, go to hell, he gave you fallout 2, and you loved it, and this is how you repay him? you suck. if you dont like how TORN or Fallout 3 are turning out, then dont play them. in the very least, if you're gonna object, do it in a respectful way, cuz you and all of us owe him at least that much.

how's that for a first post?

i fully support anything the team does for fallout 3. sure, it may be different, but i really dont mind a little change here and there. just because it's different doesnt make it bad.

(i saw this on a fallout site, but it just so happens i like arcanum too :wink

 

I think Interplay's last few releases have been indicitive of the kind of crap they're going to pull with FO3.

Let's look at it case by case...

Giants? You changed the blood color and clothed an alien so you could sell it in Wal Mart? Right? What are you going to do with FO3? No Children like FOT? Take away more moral decisions from the players? Make it cookie cutter good vs evil? I hate to say it but if I see anything less than an M rating on the FO3 box I'm definitely leaving it on the shelf and warez'ing just to see the kind of crap they put into it.

RLH (Run Like Hell) another case where you changed something, the name, to pander to a giant chain store. Censorship = BAD, it seems all IPLY wants to do is stand in line and follow the herd. Hail to the promise land--consoles, watered down dialog, and linear stories!

TORN!? When the page launched you guys listed rated "T" as a FEATURE. It's good to see you realized what a goober move this was and removed it off of the page. I think it speaks volumes that you all thought to put that in as a feature on the launch page.

Let me just say, that you will not sell 150-200K units by going along as part of the crowd, you're just going to get buried by the rest of the crowd who probably have more competent marketing departments. Let's face it Feargie, the IP marketing department sux0rz more than playing daikatana while listening to hanson and getting jabbed in the eye with rusty coat hangers. Make some waves, you can't count on your marketing department to do it.

-Killian

 

3d does indeed have the advantage of making the avatars a lot more customizable - which is something I believe most CRPG'ers like? There's something in buying those new gloves and actually PUTTING them on. There's also the possibility of varying height... no more standard-length elfs and so on. But I have also have to agree that the current 3d techniqe looks somewhat bland... although that doesn't say that is HAS to be bad. Neverwinter Nights look promising, but I can't say I think it's very spectacular, more a vision of what we might se in future CRPG's. I do prefer overhead isometric views with fixed cameras... it sort of feels more RPG to me. Maybe I'm just stuck with old views?

And what I'd like to see in FO3... a game set in and around a post-apocalyptic city (actually cruising around in a world map set in city!). Maybe play as a ghoul looking to save his poor family from some yet undefined threat... give us fallout, but gives us something different!

I liked the FO:T engine and graphics... although the char portraits and BOS armour was UGLY as hell.

 

Will 3D ruin Fallout? No, but don't forget the Law of Sequels - Black Isle and Interplay will be fighting against this law with Fallout 3. Creating a clone of Fallout 1 wouldn't be the answer either.

Game design has to move on and endlessly recycling Fallout's goodness will just result in a Soylent Green of a game with no soul at all.

Feargus has made the important point that the PROCESS of game design has changed as well - they can't wind back the clock and start using older code and less efficient processes - if only to make ends meet financially.

Even Troika have made it fairly clear that an Arcanum sequel will have a radically different graphics engine - most likely 3D.

On the subject of clones though - I do find the statement by Solid Snake that Arcanum is a Fallout clone a bit offensive. Yes, there are obvious debts (mostly graphical) that Arcanum owes to Fallout - but calling it a clone is a bit rich.

If any attempt to create an immersive, reactive RPG using 2D isometric graphics can be called a Fallout clone, then I might accept that term...maybe.

But Troika have made some major developments that move Arcanum BEYOND Fallout - at least in my view.

Graphically we have more ranges of movement, more character models - with accurate reflection of equipment, weapons etc. A wide array of spell effects and sound effects that also reflect equipment. (Armoured characters 'jingle'!!!).

In the area of game design, we have an amazingly flexible character-design and wide range of USEFUL skills. An amazing amount of 'reactivity' in the game world that reacts to the various stats, game states, race, equipment etc. REAL attempts to make combat alternatives (thieving, diplomacy, etc) FUN and PLAYABLE alternatives.

On top of that we have a whole world (well, continent at least) that can be fully explored, inch by inch if we want to.

I know I'm preaching to the converted here, but with the delay, I just need to convince myself why this game is worth waiting for - and I still believe it is.

 

I figured I'd *cough* contribute to this enlightening discussion with my own inane banter, feel free to skip ahead to the next poster since I'm not somebody "famous".
And now for some disjointed thoughts:

A) Black Isle should release the Fallout editing tools that Feargus spoke of. I'm sure that would keep everyone happy. I know this has been discussed ad infinitum before and I know there are tons of legal barriers (stupid beaurocrats) but in the end it would be great publicity and since you'd need the original Fallout to play, it would probably encourage sales.

B) I've been waiting for Ultima 7 Part 3 now for so very long that this all seems like a repeat of the hubabaloo surrounding U8 and UA. *cough* And we all know how that turned out. :sad:

C) I've yet to see a CRPG that effectively uses a 3d engine (unless you count Daggerfall and Arena but I'm not talking software mode stuff). To be quite frank, I don't see the need for all 3D. I mean, is 2D for 2D's sake really all that horrible? Still, I'm open to new things. Do your best BIS.

D) There has to be at least one two-headed cow in TORN I will not be satisfied.

E) I miss text adventure games. :sad:

 

Can someone tell me what this is all about, 'cause I sure as hell don't feel like like reading it all!

 

I want a fallout 3.

I dont care if it real time or turn based .

I dont care if its 2-d or 3-d as long as its a 3rd person view.
( if its a 1st person thats real bad because 1st person view makes me very dizzy.)

But I want the humor the atmosphere the story.

I yes and i thing it real nice when people that make games talk with the people that buy them :smile:

 

Well I'm gonna speak again

Guys, Fo:T wasn't that bad, you just have looked at what the newbies are doing and not what the good players are doing. I've been playing high tactical skirmish with mates of mine, It is really a blast. As for an RPG not being 3d, I think that some are good that way, and others aren't. I just cant imagine having to try and control everything in 3d, UNLESS it was from a first person veiw. I just find it hard to keep myself oriented unless I'm in that first person view, or in the 2d view.

Maybe what should happen is they make it both 2d and 3d, yeah it would take alot of space on an hd and take a long time to develop, but you could select your mode of play BEFORE you started, so when starting you would pick 3d or 2d, and then have your standard TB, or CTB options also. FOT brought some interesting elements into the game, one of which is CTB which I think is a rather good way of making real time (personally I think CTB is superior to all other styles of real time)

But there are elements from FO that cant be lost to be put into FO3, Now taking out children in FOT, hrrm well it wasn't probably the greatest move, but you gotta remember something guys. The gaming industry is under ALOT of flak from the regular liberal crap media because of school shootings and the kids playing doom. Feargus, while I understand you guys cant go back and use old code, you should at least TRY To redevelop some of it, maybe use the code from FOT and the 2d engine for FO3 (make sure you fix the bugs though first)
As for an MP, yeah thats they way to go, but how ya gonna do it? I think co-op really is the only way in an RPG, I have yet to figure out how you can do mp any other style than FOT has with rpgish elements. If someone else has, let me know.

And thats all I have to say for now