I prefer the way lockpicking was done in F2 over F3. Does anyone know how NV will be?

All lockpicking was in Fallout 2 was random numbers and chance rolls. Lord forbid we do any ACTUAL work to pick the lock. WHY? WHY MUST WE PICK THE LOCK OURSELVES BAW.

so far there have been no talk about this...that suggests they have lifted the system from F3 over to F:NV

New Vegas is going to have it the Fallout 3 way (whether they tweaked it somehow or just ported straight, is unknown).

I would've preferred skillchecks over minigames, though.

Yay it's the immersion vs true rpg mechanics thread!

I'm siding with Fallout 2.
I think it should be based on dice-rolls and statistics rather than some annoying minigame.

I prefer Lockicking Minigames since I actually have a chance to pick the lock, and not let random numbers decide if I can or not. I find Trying to pick the lock more immersive.

meh, personally I think they should just change the auto attempt to work like Oblivion, since that is based on your characters skill that would mean players of both preferences get there way.

I would say the Fallout 3 method was a hybrid since many locks had a minimum skill requirement, and i would be very agitated if they reverted to the Fallout 2 method.

What I want to have go away is the lock breaking so it can never be picked. Sure, I can handle having the lock Jam so I have to get better at the Skill or better tools, but not so the lock is permanently broken.

Lockpicking in Fallout 3 is way more better I do believe.

Am I the only one who supports an Alpha Protocol method? Yeah. I thought so.

I would like to keep it similar to F3. But for some reason I think I read before that you could use explosives? Or was that just someone's idea? lol

I really didn't like that there were only 4 levels of lock...25, 50, 75 and 100. It made it obvious when you couldn't do it and when you could dump enough points in lockpick to be able to. No fun, randomness or critical failure.

I wouldn't object if that didn't mean me having to avoid the certain minigame success and risking just for the sake of risking.

There could be some separate difficulty/gameplayrelated settings in the menu to play for both "teams" (skillcheckers and minigamers alike), but I doubt there will be.




What sense does a timelimit make in a footlocker, or at a door of an abandoned shack? It could work on electric doors, though.

there you are comparing them side by side again, just put a post it note over the minigame and just focus on the autolock attempt button...geez I keep telling you not to compare the two but see them as parallel roads to the same goal.

No it wasn't. In FO1&2 the lockpicking (and all skills in general) were a weighted probability based on the character's affinity for the task, and impartial fate; (in some RPG's the complexity of the lock adds a penalty).

Upshot of this is the more skilled the PC, the more likely that they can succeed. IMO this is a very reasonable method that works very realistically. It could have even been expanded in FO3 to impose additional penalty in the case of crippled arms.
----------------
In answer to the topic: I haven't seen the game in action, but its a fair assumption that it works mostly the same as it did in FO3, but I expect that this can be fixed with a user mod.

I believe in an interview Josh Sawyer said hacking and lockpicking are 100% identical to how they were in Fo3. They did not touch these mechanism's.

That is exactly what he was saying, increasing the skill improved your odds, but it was always a /roll mechanic. Just the idea of breaking a lock pick is ridiculous anyway, and using a screw driver as a tension wrench? I don't mind that it is done that way, but it isn't remotely realistic. So i would go with the more entertaining choice as opposed to the one that is abstract.

This I agree with. I don't mind the minigame, but I'd much rather have an auto-unlock option based on the lockpick skill that didn't break the lock and make it permanently inaccessible.

Here we go again :laugh:
But they are side by side on the screen. Are they not? Like two knobs: "Open" and "Open 46%". I can't avoid seeing and knowing both options are there. It's conscious decision that is right at the same line of inventing selflimitations like "carry only 5 weightless stims" despite being able to carry more. It feels false and an unneeded chore from outside of the game.

On this note, it's not a gamebraking situation or a massive nuisance, just my preference on doing things. I hate having to limit my self and pretend something is not there.

"random numbers and chance rolls" is not the same thing, and you are certainly right about the screwdriver (it also seemed rather to small, compared to the cylinder IMO).
I believe that I am misunderstanding something about your post, but am not sure exactly what. :shrug:

* I would greatly prefer a return to FO2's method, and from my own point of view, it is far more realistic and plausible that the character may fail. The idea that the player would pick the lock for the PC is just odd to me and makes the game kind of awkward (especially if the PC is unskilled, unlucky, and perhaps even crippled at the time).

agreed, I found it odd they decided to punch people who wanna skip the minigame in the stomach by doing that.

When he said random numbers, that was a misnomer of a unknown probability/outcome. I for one don't view the pc and myself to be entirely separate or together, so it is a much less definitive thing for me. I understand your view point and believe it has merit though.

:foodndrink: I am the same way at times, but it depends on the specific game. Oblivion (for instance), does not really stress much separation (nor IMO give much of a role to work with). Skills are reflective of player action in the game, and so it's minigames are a not really out of place, (at least IMO).

Its a fact that if you stick something in a lock cylinder and it breaks off, then its a good chance that the lock becomes un-pickable without first extracting the object (if even possible), or without dismantling the lock (often you must have the key to do this). What I want to see come back, is the option of blowing the lock with explosives (possibly destroying contents ~all based on the skill of the PC's use of explosives), and/or destroying the lock with a weapon like the Sledge or Power fist.

**As a side point... A lock that has something jammed in it's cylinder usually can't be opened with the key. :laugh:

Well, I personally found the way Fallout 1 and 2 handled lockpicking to be annoying. Select Lockpicking skill, click on lock. Did it work? If not, try again. And again. And again. And again. Oops, the lock jammed because of my poor skill. Good thing I saved before I tried picking the lock! Reload. Repeat. Two minutes later - Yay! I picked the lock! RPG mechanics for the win! At least Fallout 3 saved me the time by telling me I couldn't possibly pick a certain lock at my current skill.

You see, I think rolling the dice based on statistics to see if a character can pick a lock is perfectly valid - if you are playing a pen-and-pencil game. Then the success or failure of the roll can represent any number of things, and it is up to who ever is running the game whether or not it makes sense for you to be able to try again. Or you can just say, "My character is going to keep working on this lock until they get in - even if it takes all day." The GM can do a time skip (possibly based on a dice roll) and everyone is happy.

That doesn't work in a video game, real-time or otherwise. Bethesda improved all the skills from a game design perspective (keeping in mind we are talking about video game design). Fallout 1 and 2 were based off of GURPS initially, and chance of failure based on dice rolls based on stats was a direct carry over. But it is far better to have skill gates to determine whether you can attempt something, and then let the player handle the execution, or simply have the higher skill give greater benefits.

And skill "gates" are more realistic anyway. You can't accidentally hack a super computer if you aren't an expert in computers (or Science in this case). Just because I can pick those crappy Chinese diary locks doesn't mean I can pick a professional security lock - no matter how long I am able to try doing so. And you want to talk RPG mechanics? The skill gates force C&C on the player. If you didn't put the effort and time into your Lockpicking skill, you are just going to have to do without that loot behind Very Hard locked door number 2. In Fallout 1 and 2, you were almost a svcker if you put too many points in Lockpicking. Anywhere from 50-75% of the skill was good enough to pick any lock in the game with enough patience.

The lockpicking minigame is ridiculously easy in Fallout 3. While the hacking minigame can be long and drawn out, I don't see how the lockpicking game can annoy people. Few locks give me more than a two second pause, except Very Hard locks, which may take bit more time, but that is as it should be. It's no where near as frustrating as the Oblivion lockpicking game could be when starting out, and with the skill gates in place, it isn't exploitable either.


That is there to prevent exactly what I was talking about before - the "try over and over again until it works" method of lockpicking, which players would surely do. Sure, they can keep reloading and do the same thing, the the reload is an extra step of annoyance that helps prevent the behavior.