StarDestroyer.Net BBS

So close


http://www.gamebanshee.com/interviews/johndeiley1.php

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.

So any one knows whose if any is going to finish it.

You're outta date, I'm afraid. Bethesda's picked up the rights to it, and is devving it from the ground up. The original build of FO3 will, in all likelihood, never see the light of day.

White Haven wrote:You're outta date, I'm afraid. Bethesda's picked up the rights to it, and is devving it from the ground up. The original build of FO3 will, in all likelihood, never see the light of day.

Which frankly, fucking sucks. I swear Im going to curse Bethesda into eternal damnation if they fuck up F3. Oh well, atleast there's allways The-Fall.

ok so I am out of date. Bethesda's hum that might suck.

What the hell are you people talking about?!

There is no better development company in existance, save maybe Obsidian itself, to give the rights to Fallout 3. They're using the same engine as Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, FFS!

oh goody, I am now finding new levels of perversity already......

JediNeophyte wrote: What the hell are you people talking about?!

There is no better development company in existance, save maybe Obsidian itself, to give the rights to Fallout 3. They're using the same engine as Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, FFS!

I just don't see it. I realize a lot of people liked Morrowind (even though I didn't), and I really enjoyed Daggerfall, but Fallout is nothing like either of those games. To be Fallout it has to have a defined story with attention to detail. It has to have extensive dialogue trees with colorful characters, and unique locales. Yes, Fallout games also have an exploration and open-ended angle and nobody does that better than Bethesda, but the open-endedness is within a set of boundaries and the choices are binary or trinary.

When I envision Fallout 3 done by Bethesda, I picture a game that is first-person or over the shoulder third-person, that has a go-anywhere, do-anything attitude, but that does not have a strong and always-present story like a Fallout should, that has too many locales that are not detailed, colorful, and diverse enough, and that has too many characters, none with enough depth to be worthy of Fallout. I also see too much departure from the S.P.E.C.I.A.L. character creation system and the Fallout combat system. Something similar to the Elder Scrolls' combat model applied to Fallout, for instance, would be a horrid mismatch, and would end up feeling like Vampire Bloodlines (you can read how I feel about that game in its thread).

What I would have liked to have seen is a 3/4 top down game with a fixed camera, but 3D polygon graphics, a combat system similar to the continuous turn based system in Fallout Tactics (which I thought worked beautifully and would have been even better in an RPG where you only directly control one character rather than 6). Other than those changes, the character creation, skills, etc. should remain mostly the same. I'd be surprised if the game that Black Isle had mostly finished didn't strongly resemble what I've just described. I'd be astonished if the game Bethesda is working on were even close.

Morrowind was a spiffy game, yes, but the locales themselves had no life, no /feel/, and that's precisely the opposite of Fallout. Now, I've respect for them as a dev company, so who knows? I'm holding out hope that they've both learned from their fuckups in Morrowind and realized that Fallout cannot be and will never be Morrowind.

Rightous Fist Of Heaven wrote:

White Haven wrote:You're outta date, I'm afraid. Bethesda's picked up the rights to it, and is devving it from the ground up. The original build of FO3 will, in all likelihood, never see the light of day.

Which frankly, fucking sucks. I swear Im going to curse Bethesda into eternal damnation if they fuck up F3. Oh well, atleast there's allways The-Fall.

Relax. Whatever Bethesda will do to Fallout, I guess I would be nothing compared to what Infogrames did to X-Com.

PS: Die, Infogrames. Die!

Here's hoping that Bethesda will take a look at what the ACTUAL DESIGN TEAM was doing with Fallout 3 before they begin. As many have stated before, turn-based, S.P.E.C.I.A.L., and the same atmosphere, feel, characters, and plot that we've always loved would do greatly to boost my opinion of Bethesda.

Yes, Morrowind was pretty. Was it fun? A little. Would I play it again? Hell no. Let's hope Bethesda doesn't make a great franchise into a piece of crap.

That said, Elder Scrolls IV looks like it'll be quite a treat. That gives me hope.

I love all the armchair game developers who think they're a master of what makes a great game.

I loved both Fallouts. I loved Daggerfall and Morrowind. I think Bethesda is going to make an excellent game, even if it is first-person.

Heaven forbid that long-time gamers might know what's enjoyable in a game, especially when they've played the game in question. Give it a rest, Spoofe.

SPOOFE wrote:I love all the armchair game developers who think they're a master of what makes a great game.

I loved both Fallouts. I loved Daggerfall and Morrowind. I think Bethesda is going to make an excellent game, even if it is first-person.

I don't. The type of system that works for a sword and sorcery game does not work for a game with guns. Vampire Bloodlines recently proved that rather spectacularly. A Fallout 3 that uses mechanics similar to an Elder Scrolls game would not only fail to capture the feel of Fallout, but it would kill suspension of disbelief and make people want to stop playing. When an unarmored person survives a shotgun blast or SMG burst at point blank range in a first person game, suspension of disbelief goes out the window.

People expect that kind of thing in a game with swords and spells, not in one with guns, and you can't use the same system for both types games without one of them suffering because of it. It's possible that Bethesda will not change the basic Fallout system, but given that they plan for Fallout 3 to share a graphics engine with the next Elder Scrolls game, it's not too likely.

So, uh, why couldn't they get a hold of the old code? I mean, it's abandoned otherwise, right?

No one wants to work on someone else's code.

I have enough faith in Bethesda that I'm sure they won't screw it up. They should know what makes Fallout what it is, and they should also know Fallout fans are the most rabid loons on the internet.

DPDarkPrimus wrote:So, uh, why couldn't they get a hold of the old code? I mean, it's abandoned otherwise, right?

I wish they would sell the existing code to someone else, who could change a few names and references so it wouldn't infringe, and release it as a totally different game. Because even if my fears are proven unfounded and Bethesda makes a totally kickass Fallout 3, the game described in that article sounds completely awesome, and I'd still love to play it. Of course, that would never happen in a million years.

DPDarkPrimus wrote:So, uh, why couldn't they get a hold of the old code? I mean, it's abandoned otherwise, right?

They could. It'd also be a PITA to use unless they hire all of BIS to finish it.