[Sophie Miller]

Depends.

Unveiling day: Either or.

After that: NMA

You forgot The Vault.

[Britney Lopez]

You forgot The Vault.

Forgive me.

[Victoria Bartel]

wait all the way till e3?? on gamestops site it says its comming out in june. im expecting some sorta info a month after the goty edition comes out, and we will go from there.

Stores often make up release dates as they seem to feel that it looks bad to have TBA used as a placeholder. Perhaps there is concern that if they have TBA and another site has a date the one with the date will look better informed - even though the date was pulled out of thin air.

It's worth noting that many stores will swear up and down that their dates come straight from the source even when the developer has just released information that contradicts them. In late 2001, right after Bethesda announced that Morrowind would be released in Spring 2002, most stores immediately put up January release dates

As Syraxis points out, until we get something from Bethesda or Obsidian any dates you come by are suspect. I do imagine we're getting close the game's unveiling however, and within a month of the GOTY's release would seem to fit well. However I also wouldn't be surprised if we don't see much of anything until early 2010.

[Clea Jamerson]

Stores often make up release dates as they seem to feel that it looks bad to have TBA used as a placeholder. Perhaps there is concern that if they have TBA and another site has a date the one with the date will look better informed - even though the date was pulled out of thin air.

It's worth noting that many stores will swear up and down that their dates come straight from the source even when the developer has just released information that contradicts them. In late 2001, right after Bethesda announced that Morrowind would be released in Spring 2002, most stores immediately put up January release dates

As Syraxis points out, until we get something from Bethesda or Obsidian any dates you come by are suspect. I do imagine we're getting close the game's unveiling however, and within a month of the GOTY's release would seem to fit well. However I also wouldn't be surprised if we don't see much of anything until early 2010.

Considering the game is said to be released in 2010, wouldn't that be a bit late? I'd like any sort of teaser right now. Even like...a piece of concept art or something (I'd imagine they're pretty much done with the pre-production). I'm sure we all know what the game is going to be like but I'd like a flavour of what to expect.

How long did anything surface of Fallout 3 before it's release?

[Rachie Stout]

The Fallout 3 teaser was in June 2007, the first concept art in May 2007. More than a year before release.

[Gill Mackin]

Maybe Obsidian simply stinks at marketing? Alpha Protocol is supposed to come out in the middle of next month, yet where is the marketing hype? I haven't seen any publicity anywhere for the game.

[Jeneene Hunte]

Obsidian is not in charge of Fallout: New Vegas marketing, Bethesda is. Just like Sega is in charge of Alpha Protocol marketing, and they're having some major financial troubles now, so the lack of hype doesn't really surprise me much. Marketing is generally the responsibility of the publisher, not the developer.

[Neliel Kudoh]

and they're having some major financial troubles now, so the lack of hype doesn't really surprise me much.

Yeah and they're doing a wonderful job of http://blogs.sega.com/usa/2009/08/21/sega-republic-opens-in-dubai/ :thumbsdown:

[SaVino GοΜ]

Go with full looting and then you'll of course have loot overload... Unless you put strict carry limits into the game, but that's always a very unpopular move for most players. If you ask me, I'd like to see something more similar to Mad Max when it comes to the scarcity of ammunition - exceedingly rare and one of the most valuable commodities in the wastes.

I should think that exceedingly rare ammo would be the most unpopular. People like to shoot things. A ammo scarcity slider might work.

[Tamara Dost]

but I'd like a flavour of what to expect.

http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/8603/jesv.jpg

[Ridhwan Hemsome]

ahah, wow the graphics in NV look outstanding

[CHangohh BOyy]

I should think that exceedingly rare ammo would be the most unpopular. People like to shoot things. A ammo scarcity slider might work.

I'm for rare ammo, crates & crates of ammo just simply wouldn't be there for a month, much less 250 years; you can have locations that have crates of ammo, but those locations should have remained hidden, or were well defended by obstacles, security droids, and or other wastlanders that consider it theirs. It is the hallmark of the amateur DM/GM to fill a room with outrageous treasure, and it always leads to a devaluation of goods... "Oh... another minigun and flamer and rocket launcher in this crate too..." :banghead:.

You are right though... People like to shoot stuff, and Fallout was never a game for those kind of people; Making it one ruins it for the rest of us.
In Mad Max, he had no bullets, and had to bluff a lot ~then found some old shells that maybe wouldn't work when he needed them, but were too scarce to test out on anything but a real threat. ~Fallout 3 is a bit more like a post apocalyptic Rambo gun-fest, than anything like mad max was. I really ~REALLY hope that New Vegas plays more like an RPG than Fallout 3, and with more importance placed on setting, and your character ~and other characters than maintaining a paced FPS experience with ample ammo for all situations.
Its a Post apoc setting where everyone is making their own rounds unless very lucky, or very wealthy ~and neither should be the player character when starting out. A PC should start with minimal rounds if any, and run out if careless, having to resort to sticks & stones until able to find a knife or a gun, or more rounds to fit the gun she has (and the gun she has might be an antique Mauser).

Make stuff rare and expensive, and its all the more fun when you finally get one that works, and has shots to spare.
(same with high-tech stimpaks and radiation drugs... These things should be military only unless stolen, command insane prices; and perhaps even be confiscated by those that can get away with it).

[Hayley Bristow]

Considering the game is said to be released in 2010, wouldn't that be a bit late? I'd like any sort of teaser right now. Even like...a piece of concept art or something (I'd imagine they're pretty much done with the pre-production). I'm sure we all know what the game is going to be like but I'd like a flavour of what to expect.

How long did anything surface of Fallout 3 before it's release?

The Fallout 3 teaser was in June 2007, the first concept art in May 2007. More than a year before release.

Fallout 3 also had a longer developement cycle.

I'd expect New Vegas to be unveiled 8-12 months before release, leaning more towards 8 than 12. However I wouldn't be surprised if Bethesda waits even longer. For example, if they're planning for a holiday 2010 release then I could see them waiting until Apring or May. This would get them in before the conventions start to grab the media but would be late enough to let them start strong and maintain that pretty much until the end.

Obsidian is not in charge of Fallout: New Vegas marketing, Bethesda is. Just like Sega is in charge of Alpha Protocol marketing, and they're having some major financial troubles now, so the lack of hype doesn't really surprise me much. Marketing is generally the responsibility of the publisher, not the developer.

Yeah, traditionally publishers do the marketing, distribution, and PR - and generally the financing as well. Whether Bethesda is preparing to unveil New Vegas one a specific date, or once it reaches a certain developement milestone, it's ultimately Bethesda making these decisions.

[Angel Torres]

I'd agree with Gizmo's sentiment on ammo and item scarcity, to be honest. Though that would go for Fallout 4 as well as New Vegas, I suppose.

For me, the most compelling moments in, well, all of the Fallout games I've played have been those times when I've really been in dire need of supplies. Low on ammo, out of medical supplies, with even a crippled limb or two. Trying to kill just one guy real quick so that I could loot his weapons to use against the next one; and hoping his leftover ammo will last me the rest of the battle.

That only ever happens once or twice (at least in my experience) in any of the Fallout games. You always get to a point where you're pretty much a walking tank with an effectively infinite supply of whatever you're ever going to need for the rest of the game. But it's those moments that I always look back on fondly.

In an ideal world, that wouldn't necessarily have to mean constant reloading and dying all the time. Just nearly always being at that level where you have to make some hard compromises; and everything you come across to scavenge is a valuable find.

True, that wouldn't be the most popular decision, I suppose. But I don't really care about what anyone else wants in these games - I'm really only concerned with what I'd like to see...

[Danny Blight]

Well in all fairness, the only time you are ever truly hurting for ammo in the original games is during the early levels of the character. By level 5-6 there is a relatively steady flow of ammo being found either with vendors or by enemies' dropped weapons. It really got to the point where I had to be constantly selling weapons and ammo I didn't use to have more carrying space.

In fact the only real reason I wasn't able to have loads of weapons and ammo early on in the games wasn't because of their scarcity, with special encounters there were weapons buffets for the picking just about every two steps I took in any direction, the problem was that they overpowered my character way too much for me to kill them and then loot them.

If ammo was to be truly represented as scarce, then most enemies would have to be equipped with melee weapons or attack with bare fists/claws as applicable. Though I'm certain that there might be ways of making projectile weapons/lasers in post apocalyptica anyway if the know how were passed down through the generations. :shrug:

[Jordyn Youngman]

Well in all fairness, the only time you are ever truly hurting for ammo in the original games is during the early levels of the character. By level 5-6 there is a relatively steady flow of ammo being found either with vendors or by enemies' dropped weapons. It really got to the point where I had to be constantly selling weapons and ammo I didn't use to have more carrying space.

Oh, absolutely. Heck, that's the main reason I kept so many companions around in 1 and 2 - I needed someone to carry around all my extra loot. And by the end of Fallout 2, the best thing about having that car was the trunk full of ammo you'd end up with by then.

Still, the most fun I had was the early parts of those games. #2 especially, I was a big fan of the longer progression you had to go through. Starting out having to rely on tribal weapons, (and possibly the pipe gun, if you can really count that) was a lot of fun for me. I really had to struggle for my first real firearm and some decent armor - my first time through I remember it was a really hard decision if I wanted to trade out a couple of my meager supply of stimpaks in exchange for a cheap pistol. Those remain the most compelling moments of those games, for me at least. Even Fallout 3, the most fun I had was the first time I headed out from Megaton and got in over my head, trekking through with a crippled leg and trying to save my last two stimpaks for when I really needed to heal myself. And finally coming across an abandoned house, clearing the place of raiders, and crashing on a bed occupied by skeletons.

If ammo was to be truly represented as scarce, then most enemies would have to be equipped with melee weapons or attack with bare fists/claws as applicable. Though I'm certain that there might be ways of making projectile weapons/lasers in post apocalyptica anyway if the know how were passed down through the generations. :shrug:

Yeah, it probably would be kind of a tightrope to walk. Since the only way to keep things scarce would be to have your enemies not very well-equipped, either. But to take Gizmo's Mad Max anology, that's actually fairly fitting, really. Firearms were really prized possessions, not something you took out to solve every problem.

Though admittedly, that sort of setup might not work so well with the standard Fallout setup. A player who puts a ton of points into Big Guns is going to want to be able to use that skill. Maybe this idea would work better in some sort of spin-off, with a different skill set or something. Still, it would be nice if they'd be able to pull it off with NV or F4. Even if it just really meant prolonging that road to having all the supplies you'll ever need. It didn't "bother" me in Fallout 2, because I had to work so very hard to get there. It felt more like a reward for all of my struggles, as opposed to just an eventuality of playing the game and not dying.

[Teghan Harris]

http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/8603/jesv.jpg

That wouldn't happen to be J.E. Sawyer, would it? :huh:

[Jinx Sykes]

I'm for rare ammo, crates & crates of ammo just simply wouldn't be there for a month, much less 250 years; you can have locations that have crates of ammo, but those locations should have remained hidden, or were well defended by obstacles, security droids, and or other wastlanders that consider it theirs. It is the hallmark of the amateur DM/GM to fill a room with outrageous treasure, and it always leads to a devaluation of goods... "Oh... another minigun and flamer and rocket launcher in this crate too..." :banghead:.

You are right though... People like to shoot stuff, and Fallout was never a game for those kind of people; Making it one ruins it for the rest of us.

Uhm... I don't know what Fallout you played, but except for early on (Fallout 2 did this exceptionally) you'd be knee deep in ammo. Fallout had more aspects to it, but it definitely was a shooting game as well.

[Mizz.Jayy]

That wouldn't happen to be J.E. Sawyer, would it? :huh:

http://www.nma-fallout.com/article.php?id=7141

[Harinder Ghag]

A player who puts a ton of points into Big Guns is going to want to be able to use that skill.

Although I admit that I find the rare ammo idea to be completely sensible, I keep being against it for that exact reason.
If ammo was in Fallout as rare as it was in Mad Max then I just wouldn't use guns at all!
Why waste valuable skill points on a skill that I'm going to use rarely?
I'd rather spend them in melee instead - so that I can make a character that doesn't need to use guns.

So making ammo rare would just 'force' me not to use guns at all...
A possible solution could be to make the few guns considerably more powerful than any melee weapon.
But that would be the other extreme - it would force me to use guns (at least sometimes) whether I like them or not!

The only 'balanced' solution I personally can think of, is to get rid of all gun related skills completely and allow improvement in their use only through perks.
I think that would work - ammo could be extremely rare but holding on to a gun would make sense.

But the gun skills are a big part of Fallout as I see it. Getting rid of them would be another big step towards changing it into some other game
(it wouldn't even be Oblivion with guns anymore )
And I don't know if I'd want that... I think I'd rather keep my crates of ammo.

[Sharra Llenos]

http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/8603/jesv.jpg

I like that man.

[Veronica Flores]

I don't think you should be able to get real good at Big Guns skill in a post-apocalyptic wasteland anyway. I think it should come down to pumping some points into it for the purpose of being a little more effective with a powerful weapon you just came across to help you through a tough spot.

The risk is that you won't be effective enough with the weapon and waste those points, and the reward would be getting through a difficult spot in the game much more easily. I could see it being a good balance. You really shouldn't have a 99 in Energy Weapons or Big Guns. It doesn't make any sense.

Then Small Guns would fall between Big Guns and Melee and Unarmed. It may disappoint some people, but I think that's the way it should be.

[Elina]

Having to spend points to make it through one thing and then never using it again would be very poor design.

But much of Fallout's skill system was counter-intuitive. Tagging a skill that your character realistically would have no way of obtaining, and raising it to high levels while never even touching one just makes no sense. Fallout 2 for example.. I know it's been done to death, but a tribal tagging energy weapons while the best weapon he can scrounge up from his entire village is a flint spear? You could have it over 100 in a few levels and not expect to see so much as a laser pistol for several levels to come.

Fixing it would require reworking the fundamental system however, and I don't want to be the near the intenet if that happens. The cries would be deafening and I can't swim so well in an ocean of tears.

[Cathrin Hummel]

Uhm... I don't know what Fallout you played, but except for early on (Fallout 2 did this exceptionally) you'd be knee deep in ammo. Fallout had more aspects to it, but it definitely was a shooting game as well.

:shrug: Ammo had weight, weight vs usefulness, vs sale value. In Fallout you could very likely regret leaving that third rocket for keeping the minigun ammo (or vice versa). Fallout [to a point] was self limiting... FO3 is?

~Also [at the risk if ignoring the 500 pound gorilla here], FO3 should be held to a double (even triple) standard, given that it's got 6 to 9 years on Fallout, and it requires 64 times the ram, a dedicated 3d accelerator and a 2400 MHz CPU (instead of 90 MHz).
Point being... it doesn't matter if Fallout3 surpasses Fallout in some ways, what matters is how greatly it surpasses... IE. simply having the same [arguably less complex] dialog mechanics should never be sufficient given the enhanced demand on the system (and the enhanced capability of common systems)...
FO3 should have amplified the original intents of the series by having the most detailed environmental affecting C&C dialog system to date ~and it doesn't. That doesn't make it a bad game by any means, but it does make it fall short of its potential. Fallout 3 could have had the best of TES, and the best of Fallout (magnified and enhanced by several years progress), but it only has the best of TES and the trappings of Fallout (and several TES flaws carried over).

Having to spend points to make it through one thing and then never using it again would be very poor design.

Amended quote: I actually disagree with this quite a bit; No one forces the player to max out Traps or Barter (or medical ~which should never have been merged IMO); but for those that choose to, there should be options unattainable by any other choice... The maxed medical PC should have surgical options where the 50% PC has none (or at least a really high chance of failure and no chance of the best possible outcome).

But much of Fallout's skill system was counter-intuitive. Tagging a skill that your character realistically would have no way of obtaining, and raising it to high levels while never even touching one just makes no sense. Fallout 2 for example.. I know it's been done to death, but a tribal tagging energy weapons while the best weapon he can scrounge up from his entire village is a flint spear? You could have it over 100 in a few levels and not expect to see so much as a laser pistol for several levels to come.

Fixing it would require reworking the fundamental system however, and I don't want to be the near the intenet if that happens. The cries would be deafening and I can't swim so well in an ocean of tears.

Agreed, and I think the Witcher solved that somewhat. In the Witcher you can harvest alchemical ingredients from a monster only if you know what they are; So... You can cut off the claw of the frightener, but might not know to extract the eye, unless you'd read about it.

In Fallout, skills could (IMO should) be restored and added to, where the PC can read information on say... energy weapons, and have an inkling about them when they find one, but were previously unaware that they existed prior to learning (or at least were totally unfamiliar with them ~kind of like Samuel Jackson's character in Diehard 3, where he knew nothing of automatic weapons, and was unable to shoot one ~for not understanding the safety lock).


@Rebet:
Guns would be scarce and valuable (as would the skills to use them).
Imagine in a modern Fallout (made with a bit of Torment's attitudes & concepts), that your PC could train an NPC in proper fire arm use. Also there are [or should be] places in the FO world (often undiscovered by most) that would have heavy weapons and small arms with lots of ammo... A PC that spent the time reading up on their use would greatly benefit from finding such a cache, over one that honed their skill with a hammer or brass knuckles instead ~but both could benefit from selling the arms.


* There is a fantastic article on mobygames.com (which I can't link to due to extreme & profuse language), that showcases the evolution of RPG's [ignoring the 70's and starting] from the dawn of the 80's up to the [then current] Witcher.
Its a great [and tremendously long] article that I found worth reading. It mentions BlackIlse & Bethesda games a lot.

Its called "The World of Western RPGs" (and can be searched for by that quote)

[Charlotte Lloyd-Jones]

I'd think another fix to the PC amassing a king's ransom after some hours of play would be to introduce inflation or supply and demand considerations. I'm no economist (never even took a class), but after dumping 100 laser pistols into the market, I wouldn't be upset if I didn't get as much money for the next load. In a simple example, each level would get you 10% less or something like that.

Or, as you gain wealth and levels, everything just costs more. That would make sense to me, too.

I'd like anything, really, that reduces my character ending up the richest person in the world with more money than he or she can spend, nothing to spend it on, and no drive to get more.