Ive played every game in ther series... i have to say. I would rather have fallout 1 and 2 redone with the oblivion engine than, have fallout 3 in the van buren engine.
bethesda did a great job with fallout 3. mega nostalgia. the oblivion engine is the best rpg engine out there for the simple fact that every object in the game is physics enabled.

I mean really.. a game where 95% of combat is with firearms.. why wouldnt you go fps?

ok now on to my point. heres some comments from the recent new vegas picture showing marcus from fallout 2

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs104.ash2/38554_456085662672_20320777672_6059935_6902560_n.jpg
--------- without further ado.. ignorant people
I like how they have a big character from Fallout coming back now, but they'd better not [censored] this up
Furthermore, the DC mutants were [censored]. They seemed like they were based off of what you saw in Fallout Tactics, which is the only Fallout Game I'm sure these guys (people who say they looked better) have played...

i hate all these 3d fps stuff

It's like they took the [censored] up Bethesda models and ACTUALLY MADE THEM SOURCE-ACCURATE

glad to see them actualy working on super mutants

I just hope the main story isn't so short.

looks gay as [censored]. I hate it so damn much.

It's called opinion. Everybody is entitled to theirs. Just because you don't agree with theirs, doesn't mean they're wrong.

yea they're just opinions, usually the kind of opinions that need a lot of whining and crying just to be heard since they're in such a minority :rofl:

Its cool! no argument there... but why is that important in an RPG?

Because I liked it in the first game, and the second game, and the first spin off game, and the unmade third game (Yes it would have had TB combat; The RT stuff was just already in the engine).

Just because they're in the minority, doesn't mean their opinion has no meaning. Theirs is just as valid as yours.

Many human beings are naturally resistant to change. If they don't like it, they don't like it.

Everywhere, all over the world, at this very instant, there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people who hate the things you love.

that's true, i'm just giving one reason why some negative comments exist from the op's post

in MY OPPINION fallout 2 was the best. is it the best? i dont care. if you dont like turn based combat thats fine. i dont think a single fallout game has svcked (exept for brotherhood of steel)

Yeah, but if they could just slip away from FPS all the time eh...

Ah... yeah, we are agreed on this :foodndrink:

(Though technically I like FO1 better than FO2 ~even though I would choose FO2 over FO1 if I had to pick one over the other to play on a trip)

Well, there's a reason why people played the original Fallouts. And Bethesda effectively took over their much-loved franchise, so I wouldn't be surprised if many of them wanted it back to the way it used to be. I don't think I'd love it if a series that I'd followed for years suddenly changed style completely.
I, for one, wouldn't want a turn-based game as I've never played the originals, and I'm a Bethesda man through and through. But I can understand that some would want one.

I loved the old Fallout games (and Wasteland even more)! The only thing I didn't like about them was.. the combat. It was slow, clunky and demanded no skill whatsoever, only patience.

Having the original team make a new Fallout with today's technology at their hands is what I dream about.. and Fallout: New Vegas is as close to that dream as we may come in a long time. Yes, I am pretty excited about this title. I mean, Bethesda made the right decisions in trying to move an old game into a new format. They failed to bring the humour and the writing of the first two games though and this is where Obsidian will shine. Bethesda's technology + Obsidian's writers sounds like a fantastic combination on paper. Let's hope they mix well in the game too!

Best shown by example...

Take two beat'em ups.
The first has PCs with a dozen or so prefab moves each (that repeat several hundred times during play).
The second has no prefab moves at all, and no limit to what moves you can invent in your turn.
Unlike Streefighter, you can pull off your opponent's arm, leg, head, etc...
My interest stays with a game like this over a game like Streetfighter :shrug:

Hmmmmmm, let's see.......... MATTER OF OPINION.

And because we aren't all COD fans

Bethesda did an excellent job! From what I've played of the older games I thought FO3 was a sensational improvement. I like the older games and the more I play them the more I like them but theres no Denying Greatness, FO3 ROCKED! I didn't play the originals at the time and thus don't hold the same special feelings towards them others have. Bethesda thankyou for Fallout 3 I loved it! FO3 for me is the way you feel about FO1 & 2.

i agree, fallout 3 had lots of faults, but it still was an awesome game especially considering it was bethesdas first try at a fallout game, and even with all the faults and things that coould of been better, like the Stats Skill and Perk system, it was still great, FO3 sold more than all the other fallout gamesp ut together and the future fallout games will be way better than FO3 was, FO3 had lots of faults and things that were broken but bethesda i believe dumbed the game down because so many new people who never heard of fallout would be playing it, and they did have to establish the series all over again, and the best way to do that is to make it more simplified but the future fallout games i think will be even more complex and fun, better skill and perk system etc, more challenging over the course of the entire game instead of being super powerfull by level 15 or so. so i give bethesda an A- for the game.

i honestly played fallout 3 first. then one day i was going through my old game discs and found fallout 2. apparently my dad bought at a Goodwill a long while back. but we never attempted to play it. i loved it way more then fallout 3. so no one call me an old guy afraid of change.

but after i played i tried fallout 1. and it was a major downgrade. i hated not being able to turn in more then 1000 caps at once to a merchant. also other things that i cant recall at the moment. but yeah they were both good

People have different opinions, I mean, Van Buren looked amazing and I wish I could of played it. But at the same time I still love Fallout 3 and I also love the originals. I like Fallout 3 more in terms of gameplay mechanics and graphics, but I like the originals more in terms of story, atmosphere, and the entire stat system. That is why New Vegas will likely be my favorite Fallout game, because it seems like it combines everything that was great from both.

Fallout 2 had all the fixes needed in Fallout 1, and it was bigger.

**The caps fix was needed, but it didn't bother me too much (since you can just tap 9's on the keyboard) ~Not being able to move NPC's was the real pain.

While I personally would not want a turn based game (before my time). I respect the opinions of the so-called "old-schoolers" and the older games in the series. I just get very annoyed when some of them take EVERY chance they get to make a jab at Fallout 3, but it is to be expected, given all the drastic changes to the old formula. I also dislike people making jabs at so-called "old-schoolers" due to their seniority and long-term dedication to the franchise. :fallout:

:foodndrink:
Love the Star Wars avatar BTW

Just to clarify though... TB games generally came 2nd after RT games. The big game that Interplay made prior to Fallout was a First person realtime dungeoncrawl, and TB games are still here; they are not dead or past prime. This game here is on the shelf at Walmart right now sharing the shelf with Starcraft 2 and Fallout 3.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0RnT5cWWDM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bz5l6bv-Zok

Dedication and Fantaticism are split by a very thin line, but that's ol' Listerman being his usual cynical self.
I honestly think I would have passed on Fallout 3 if it had kept the Turn Based combat, even if they tried to make it updated and indepth, it would probably have wound up as bad as Gladius back on the original XBOX was.
As my opinion remains firmly, I hate the combat system of the originals- and very much prefer the first person perspective to...you know...explore the world without it turning into a lifeless chessboard.

I don't know man, I think that both systems have their place.

My personal opinion as to why turn-based is good for an RPG is because that way you take the player skill out of the physical actions and they can be counted for only character skill. If a player is shooting an enemy and the crosshair is straight on the enemy but they miss due to low character skill, the player will be pissed off and call it a bad game (ex: Alpha Protocol). In a turn-based game you avoid this type of thing by simply making it so that the player does not shoot, they tell the character when and how to shoot, but the character's skill determines whether the shot will hit or not. This removes the need for suspension of disbelief while still retaining the core RPG element of character skill supersedes player skill. It's mechanically superior to have turn-based combat in RPGs is what I'm saying. Of course, you can just make character skill affect damage, but then you get the problem of "why doesn't a clip of bullets to the head kill this guy?" and things like that.

The obvious benefit to action gameplay is just that- it puts you into the action and you get a better feel for what you are doing at the moment. It can let you be the character rather than having you be the puppetmaster. For example, it's far easier to get scared in an FPS game where you can't see 360 degrees around you and have the suspicion that a monster can leap at you at any given time.

In the end it comes down to RPG elements vs Action elements vs Realism.

I have no strong feeling either way, I just feel that combat in Fallout 3 was done poorly from both the RPG and realism perspectives (I thought the action was okay). I do like Falout 1 and 2 better than Fallout 3, but I don't necessarily feel that there needs to be a TB game (though I would like one- perhaps a spinoff like tactics developed by someone other than Beth). Oh, and I played Fallout 3 before Fallout 1 and 2 (and Fable was my first RPG), so you can't exactly say I'm a bitter old man or anything.

Why are physics so important, though? And what has it got to do with a TB game?

I wouldn't have gone with FPS for the simple reason that the market is full of them already - and mostly because, in RPGs, I like TB combat more than running and gunning; and the fact that it's not my skill, but the characters that make the difference. With a TB game, I can feel the same amount of tension (though differently) a RTFPS has and relax at the same time.

That isn't to say that FPSs are inherently bad, or that I think a good Fallout game couldn't be done with the current method of presentation. It also doesn't mean that I think Fallout 3 is a bad game in it self, just lacking as a sequel. Fallout 3's biggest failure, in my opinion, was the lack of impact the skills and stats had (that the older games with their turnbased combat and other functions had). They didn't make enough a difference to my liking, and rather than relying in what I had built through out the game, I had to rely more on my mousearm and twitching skills just like when I play Serious Sam. Now, that is fixable - at least to a point, with somewhat satisfactory results for both parties - and I hope Obsidian sees to it.

Just my 2 cents.

I feel that this is a big stygma attatched to the very thought of Turn-Based combat. The old Fallouts were dealing with computing limitaions that have been greatly surpassed, back then the question could have been asked "Why would you want Real Time Combat? Look at how awfuly Adventure looks!" (Yes I am an old-time gamer) The point being that you could have a fully explorable/destructable world with richly developed/rendered characters/set pieces and even a first person perspective; but also have Turn-Based combat.

im fine with opinions.. but they are being uselessly hostile.
it seems like they are acting like this to be "eliet" like they think fallout 3 svcks because everyone likes it or something. They are refuseing to give into logic or reason.

They seem to treat it like its a first person shooter. well.. its not... fallout 3 and new vegas are NOT FIRST PERSON SHOOTERS that would be like calling oblivion a first person shooter, or a first person slasher?. They are real time role playing games played in the natural human perspective (being the first person) , that's most logical combat weapons are guns.

I might as well call fallout 1 and 2 a single player warhammer 40k type game.