Yeah i do know alot of games use turn based combat but it turns alot of players cold. I loved it in Final fantasy 7 but every game since i've not really taken to it. It just doesn't excite me. ANd as for having no proof, your right i don't. It's an estiamated guess, no need to get your nickers in a twist. But i'd be willing to bet money that 1st person is a more popular form of comabt in games full stop than turn based. If you think otherwise then prove me wrong. Just look at the amount of blockbuster 1st persons shooters compared to the mediocre rgp drivel they sheepishly churn out.

I've never played Baldurs gate, never will and turn based combat will never compare to the pace of 1st person end of.

Did you not read what i wrote in my last post about nostalgia? I mentioned the people who used to play it have probably had a break from it at somepoint and would have went back to it because of their good memories of it. Wanting to play it again, 'longing for the past'.

As for people who played fallout 3 first then went back and though the first ones were better so what? What does that mean? Some people prefer the 1st game, some don't. I don't even know why it's such a touchy subject.
I bet there's just as many if not more who prefer fallout 3. Let's not forget that us here on the forums are the minority and mainly the hardcoe fans, no-one else can be bothered with these sites so what you read from other people or from polls represents nothing. Nothing accurate atleast.

But we all know you old-skool Fallout fans are the most hardcoe, i mean you have to be right? you like the old ones best, course you are...

When Bethesda releases Fallout 4 and it's turn based instead of the more popular 1st person you can quote this message in [censored] and i'll eat it.

I'm off to bed

What you discrible is mostly just "window dressing", for example you can get many of those things with OBSE mods in oblivion. The core gameplay and combat mechanics are the same in both games. It's like saying each of the many versions of Monopoly are totally different from each other but in reality they just have different houses and miniatures.

I didn't mind that. I'd often jump from high bridges just to get my Agility up. I'd like to be able to do that in Fallout.


I preferred Pathgrids. They were so easy, compared to Navmeshes which I still can't get the hang of. Plus I can view pathgrids while playing without my game crashing :hehe:
I also miss being able to enchant weapons and clothing.
I played Oblivion the other day and had to re-map the keys to match Fallout as I was jumping instead of opening something and drawing my weapon instead of going into third person. Amazingly I never once tried to activate VATS. Perhaps because the C key is closer than the V key

What does Fallout have that Oblivion doesn't? Children and toilets.

Yeah it's going to use the same assests as FO3 but that doesn't mean they will absolutely 100% have the same exact mechanics in it.

your loss, I guess it's one of the better RPGs out there.

whats that supposed to mean? :rolleyes:

Actually, Baldur's Gate wasn't really turn-based. You could either attack in real time or pause, queue up all your party member attacks and then unpause and let everything happen... but the enemies definitely did not wait for you to do whatever you wanted to do.

It actually was, you had the option to auto-pause at the start of every turn if you liked. What it did was just continuously play through the turns, in essance it was "faking RT". IE say your character has 2 attacks listed. What the game would to is make your two attacks and deal damage to the enemies if you hit, then would play the attack animations to "fake it" until your turn came up again. You can easily notice the "turns" if you play or use Magic alot. You caster will stand around and do nothing if yo utry to cast two spell in a row before your next "turn" come up.

The RTwP was a coverup for the actually D&D turn mechanics behind the scenes.

"The same sort of role-playing experience" does not mean "will be using the same assets". It means IT WILL BE LIKE FALLOUT 3. They are using the same engine, the same gameplay style. The fact that you don't like it is not going to change it.

I don't doubt that things will be tweaked here and there, but you can bet dollars to donuts that they are not going to make it a turn based game. You're being petty with your arguments here, and are demonstrating a severe unwillingness to look at the reality of the situation, which happens to be that Fallout has changed.

Fallout has the amazingly awesome ruins of D.C. and the fighting isn't just Hack n' smash.

I never said anything about it being turn based....you put those words into my mouth. I just said you can't say it will be 100% just like FO3 mechanics for the sole reason that your not on the obsidian dev team so can't know that information. Also no need to get all snippity....

And this is what I meant by you being petty. Consider what was being discussed, and consider what I meant. Context is key, my friend.

Oblivion isn't either. There are ranged options like magic and arrows. Both can be hack and smash. Or both can be run and gun.

Indeed they won't make it turn-based anymore. They've already established their new rules and mechanics for the next games, throwing away most of what the previous titles had, for the benefit of their target audience.

They've designed the game for the masses, for people who are not always used to play RPGs, and as such, those of us who prefer the older titles are in a severe minority and nothing can be done to make them change their mind. Even if we don't buy their new games, they won't see the different, financially. And they know that. Bethesda is no longer an independant RPG developper, but a mass market RPG developper. Business is business. To help their company grow, financially, they have no other choice but to appeal to a wider audience.

They already established their target audience since Oblivion (And Morrowind to an extent, if compared to Daggerfall).

This being said, I like Fallout 3 for one thing, its modding capabilities. I consider the game a good post-apocalyptic RPG designed by Bethesda but certainly not a good Fallout title.


Soo, for things that Fallout 3 has that Oblivion doesn't. Better and more interesting dialogue/conversations. Some NPCs are actually interesting.
The world is much more interesting to explore. It is smaller, but much better detailed. Most places of interest have a backstory to it.
The main quest is actually better and more interesting as well. (Oh noes! Daedra invade! We are all proffessional Blades, but we shall send an anonymous prisoner deal with the monsters while we throw parties at our headquarters! )

:facepalm:





Hmm first you say they will use the same mechanics then you say they won't use the same mechanics then and won't use turn based.


As you see I never mentioned Turn-based, I just said you can't know 100% they will use the exact same mechanics is seen in FO3.

So you argue with me one one point then the next post you contradict yourself and then put words in my mouth, then call me petty? Interesting....:shrug:

Edit: Indeed cliff indeed.

lol n/m kinda wrong thread.

I suppose I should have said "similar" mechanics, but I didn't really expect you to interpret what I said to mean "100% untouched same exact thing as Fallout 3". It's obvious that I don't know what will be changed.

I think you just like to argue. As it happens, you're not very good at making a point.

About my thoughts aswell. Well, bar the modding which I haven't learned.

This got nicely derailed because a couple of members seemed to really want to make this about the older Fallout games. Which was not relevant to the question posed in the OP. Next time you wish to belabor, yet again, the mechanics of FO1/FO2 and your belief in their awesomeness over any other game, use the Fallout Series section.