Arcanum graphics...

Dunno if this got answered, but WHY THE FRO IS FEARGUS OVER HERE ANYWAYS

 

Hey, I only insult Feargus on the basis of Fallout2 mostly. I'm sure he's a very nice guy and very talented. I think that he and his crowd just need to focus their energy on some game unique to them (sure, TORN, whatever) and leave the Fallout series to someone that will treat it and us right. Hey, that reminds me, I'll have to reinstall Fallout2 tonite and load up my old saved games of 'SteveMinigunsFeargus', 'DynamiteFeargus' and 'PlasmarifleMeetFeargus'. I'm sure I'll be in terrible pain doing it, since my trip to the orthodontist (yes, I'm in my mid 20's and having to get braces a 3rd time despite the fact I take damn good care of my teeth - genetics can be a bitch my friends) left me with a dozen rubber washers jamned into my teeth. For those of you who don't know how that feels, it's a lot like playing Daikatana.

 

Hmmm.. Tim had nothing to do with Planescape. And if that game was "in the box" it is a box that is not a happy place. 8*) Sure Chris won't make Fallout the world that Tim would of, but that does not make it bad. But Tim has implies that he would approve of most things that Chris did with it.

-gustavef

 

Okay, first of all - Tim Cain is not some mofo who knows so many people are looking into his mouth catching his every word and ruin his old friends and colleagues' day by saying his _personal_ opinion on this matter. I've seen this with Fallout 2, where he gave it a good review because the game was still in development, saying that he would buy a game. And some time after that he gave another interview where Tim said he left mainly because Black Isle and Interplay didn't listen to his recommendations and storyline sketches AT ALL, so he left. So you see, when you hear Tim Cain saying that someone does a good job, don't believe him - he's just that nice.

Second, I think BIS is not that bad as you portray it. After all, they did gave us Planescape Torment, they know how to make AD&D games. UNFORTUNATELY they do not know how to make Fallout games, and we all saw what happened with rushed Fallout 2, Fallout's first commercial spinoff game(just like FOT, but it seems like very little number of people recognise this fact). Feargus says that 'it will be cool'. Well, waddayaknow, this is EXACTLY WHAT I AM AFRAID OF! That it will be 'cool' or better yet, 'k3wl"! And if Avelonne really made the New Reno, then I know what to expect from Fallout 3 - 'bread and circus', sex, drugs, violence, the attributes common in a game that has nothing to show in the areas of gameplay, graphics and gaming world...

Fallout in realtime combat is not a crime, unless realtime will be something more than timesaving option when battling rats. As for 3D, it is not a crime by default. Of course, if we will have to battle the raiders and the camera (and, God forbid, do this in realtime), then it would be pretty bad. As for the details issue (prerendered objects have more details than those rendered in realtime), as someone said above - look at Vampire Masquerade. The graphics look incredible, and without sky-high system requirements. Plus, it is not the engine that makes a game beautiful - it's the people who are making the game. If they have a limited amount of polygons to make a great scene, well, if they are really as talented as they brag, they will find a way.

P.S - This was the last time you saw Feargus Urquhart. He will not come back after the flaming you gave him.
P.P.S - Dotard, you are a disgrace.

 

"Hmmm.. Tim had nothing to do with Planescape."

While I agree people shouldn't be saying that Tim Cain was the heart of BIS and that they can't make anything good w/o him.

But PS:T doesn't exactly give me a lot of hope. Well, it was a different type of game, I'll leave it at that.

Anyway, I don't think the problem with us is that BIS is lacking capable designers, it is what they want to do with the Fallout franchise.

 

PaladinLord:

"Why you may ask ? Well PORII is turn based only and it's AD&D if it outsells BG II then BIS will have to sit up and take notice that TB is indeed still popular. "

...with the D&D crowd.

"You can say how much better TB is till your blue in the face but gaming trends and sales figures (of recent meaning last 2 years) don't tell the same story."

I guess you don't have them on you, eh? Really, though, sales figures for TB games are fine.

"PS. Dues Ex was voted PCZone RPG of the year for 2000."

I agree. I thought it was the best as well.

"FO3 is going to be 3d there really is no question of that of that anyway."

Yup. And personally I thought that could be the best change they could make in the series.

"Whether or not it will have TB combat, a TB option or real time with pause depends on how well each does in other coming games I would think."

Why should it? There is very little to compare with. TB games have shown to do very well when they are given the chance...

"If niether outsell BG II then they will conclude that they may as well go with the real time/order pause because they are"

Blah blah. Why the obsession with BG? Fallout isn't some D&D, RPG-lite BG clone. It doesn't HAVE to be anything like it to sell well.

There are plenty of different niches in the gaming market. Fallout filled one of those and did very well because of it.

Not every game can be a Baldur's Gate, and not every would do well if they try.

 

"There are plenty of different niches in the gaming market. Fallout filled one of those and did very well because of it".


I can imagine that at a board meeting :smile:

"Guys we can make a turnbased game that will be targetted at a niche market with a 400,000 strong fanbase". "Or we can make a game with the same kind of real time combat system that has netted us close to 3 million sales over the last 3 years".

<The board retires to consider while looking at yachting magazines>

FO3 will be what BIS makes it end of story.
All this board hopping is making me dizzy :grin:
After TORN will be a better time to reflect on how much success is down to AD&D and how much is down to the games themsleves.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: PaladinLord on 2001-05-15 16:38 ]</font>

 

"Or we can make a game with the same kind of real time combat system that has netted us close to 3 million sales over the last 3 years"."

Funny you should mention that. I can think of several games that have done just that...where are they? I don't see Summoner, Soulbringer or Evil Islands raking in millions.

Fallout isn't BG, it isn't Fantasy and it isn't D&D. If they made the game for the BG crowd it wouldn't be Fallout.

Just saying "Look at BG" is a terrible argument that has no merrit.

 

I'm with Decado on this one. He makes good points that seem well thought out.






P.S. I thought BG sucked...

 

*monkey agrees with Vikjunk and Decados posts above*

actually i hate the combat system in BG, it was better in BG2, but still annoying. the challenge is mostly lack of knowlage about the moster, or a random throw of the dice.

if you know its weakness you don't need any skill. the fights that can be hard is mostly those when the enemy got a slim chanse to kill you and by the god of gamblers succeds in its dice throw of 666 with a 3 t6 throw.

BG2 is not a bad game imo, i've enjoyed it, but to say that its combat system is good is just nutty.

 

Just some thoughts....feel free to totally ignore!
I played Fallout 2 before Fallout.( and by the time I got it over here in the UK , the final patch had already come out) It was the first crpg I had ever played and i thought it was absolutely fantastic. ( so much so that as soon as I had finished it I bought Fallout...which I also thought was a terrific game)
The two parts that stick out in my memory were first encountering "The Den" and ....get your flame guns out boys ... *whispers*
" New Reno"
So to get things into perspective I am really happy on two counts:
1. that (after virtually losing hope) there WILL be a Fallout 3 ( hooray!)
2.That Chris Avellone will be writing it!

Maybe I'm just a "bread and circus" kind of a girl!

p.s.The graphics choice doesn't really matter to me....(I just hope that the combat system will ( at the very least) have the option of being turn based)

 

I liked New Reno too. It sort of captures moral corruption,betrayal and sometimes that the only choice is to choose a lesser evil.

There is a 99% chance I will enjoy FO3 in any case as long as they don't do a really awful interface or make things complicated just for the sake of it.

 

'Bread and circus' indeed. Moreover, New Reno is out of place just like mafia would be out of place in fantasy RPG.

 

You know I think what we often have is a sort of disconnect between marketing and design. Here's what I see happening at Interplay over and over again: Design guys have a new game they're going to make. Great concept, wonderful plans they'll try to implement. Marketing comes along and asks them what they're doing, so they can go out and start creating hype for it. Design guys tell them all the wonderful cool things they intend to do, and the Marketing guys go out they and preach it like it's already done. Flash forward, oh, a year or however long the game needs to take. Design guys have found out that they can't do all the wonderful cool things they wanted to do, or can't do them as well. But does Marketing ever go and update what's true about the game? Hell no. They just keep promoting it like it is unless something they'll say is a blatant lie. They'll twist and omit as much as they can. Anyone remember the much vaunted 'Dynaverse' of Star Fleet Command? Or that VOS (I think it was something like that, Voice Operated System or maybe VBS I dunno I broke the cd's in half) from Klingon Academy? Or 'Original Storyline and Exciting Adventures' from Fallout2? Oh wait that's just me being bitter. Anyway, I basically never believe the press anymore. I also assume the worst, because the video game market is not about making quality products, it's about making money, and as much as possible. Which means lowest common denominator games are all the proverbial rage. Which means Troika is tilting at the windmllls, but I love them for it.

 

well good luck to all of you as to getting what you want in FO3. developers dont respond well to unappreciative fans. if you want something changed in the game, flaming the developer and criticizing every nit picking detail of his previous work is NOT the way to go. maybe if you people had more open minds you'd take a liking to a 3d engine and real time combat. i personally would like to see BOTH turn based and real time in, to appeal to both sides, but i dont really care if it has to be one or the other. i dunno, i guess you hardcore rpgers just cant stand to have things change in the rpg world at all, but you sure are gonna be sorry later on. change is inevitable, and all of you crybabies are gonna be real unhappy later on. if you dont like 3d, if you dont like real time, then just dont buy fo3 when it comes out. there's no sense in flaming feargus or bitching and moaning, cuz it wont do a thing. if you dont like it, just keep your opinions to yourselves, cuz they dont mean a thing.

 

Didn't he just basically tell us all to screw off for voicing our opinions? That's pretty lame man. A game is not simply the sum of all it's features. The soul of a game is a lot more. Fallout is (at least in it's original incarnation) a wonderful thing, rich in potential. What I think a lot of us object to is wasting that potential, and tying it down with whatever cheap currently-popular technological innovation can be found. Telling us to get on the train or walk is like telling REAL fans of Batman that they should either shut up and try to enjoy the 'add another villian or two and another lame sidekick' movies that have been coming out, or find another superhero. Ever since the 3rd one (and debateably the 2nd, though I'm flexible on that) those movies have been going downhill. Just pop-cheese designed to max the profit margin and rape the story. You hear me Joel Schumaker? Bring me the one who cast Tommy Lee Jones as Two-Face instead of Billy D Williams! I have a red hot poker for that person....*poke!*poke!*poke!*

 

*raises hand*

Guys, knock it off now. I haven't touched any of the FeargusFlaming, but I'm drawing the line here. I don't want to go on a lock/delete spree here.

 

To Evil Dictator:
There are some post here (no names) that deserve that and you know it.

 

Yes, I know it. I didn't see this thread in time though (it was at page 4 or 5 when I noticed it) so I let it slide, not seeing the point in deleting now.

 

Hey I didn't even flame Feargus that last time! My minigunning has been quite effective in dealing with my anger. :smile: Anyway, one apology is in order - uh not for Feargus but for Tommy Lee Jones. He's a good (enough) actor and I think that he could have done a really REALLY good Two-Face. That is, if the script had allowed. Personally I didn't mind Jim Carrey's Riddler so much (oddly enough) but the way Schumacher made Two-Face out was all whacky 'wheee look at me I can be spastic as Jim Carrey on Acid look at me woohooo I'm funny wierd hahahhaa!'. That's not Two-Face. Anyway, Billy D Williams would have been a lot better as Two-Face. Plus he was owed the part anyway since he played Harvey Dent in the first one.

More to the point, if dissatisfied fans outnumber satisfied ones by a margin of some 10 to 1 then why shouldn't the gaming company listen to them? Are they only wanting to sell to 10% of the market? I mean how much sense does that make? Are they so sure that their whacky new ideas will win us all over? (Whacky new ideas being ones that other people have already tried out and we've already had a taste of so we know what we're talking about when we say 'nooo don't do that!')