FPS-style or FO1/2 style? : Fallout: New Vegas

» Fri May 27, 2011 12:40 pm

Some great points just on this last page!

To me, immersion in a RPG isnt due to a camera angle or the style of combat. Its due to the writing, and how good or consistent it is.
I personally found the older games to be far more immersive than Fallout 3 could ever hope to be. It cant really even be nostalgia. I played Fallout and Fallout 2 for the first time in the 2000's.

I totally agree. I play the original games constantly because of all Killaps (and everybody else's) great work and every time I play those games I get really immersed in my character and I think it has a lot to do with the fact that I really can be specific with each kind of character I decide to play. Fallout 3 didn't have this and really disappointed me this way. I felt like I was watching a demo for a exploration game instead of actively playing a role playing game. I don't need iso and turn-based for a good Fallout game but I'd certainly prefer it since that's what Fallout started as and those are the games which I was introduced to and fell in love with many years ago. But just as I don't need iso and turn-based I can look past just about any style as long as the writing is good, choices consequences in the game-world the way the first two did and the character development is interesting. I trust the Obsidian guys to do this but I am still very cautiously skeptical.

I've played Fo1 again last year and it was a much more memorable experience than Fallout 3.

I've got it installed at work through GOG! Shhh, don't tell!

People keep telling me that I need to play that game. Alas the only Troika game I've played is Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines, but since I consider Bloodlines one of the best RPGs of the last decade I suppose that I should try out Arcanum sometime.

Yeah, you should. The combat svcks but if you like the original Fallouts you absolutely need to play this game. The ability to really tweak your characters is probably unparalleled (at least in comparison to the games I've personally played).

» Fri May 27, 2011 8:11 pm

The methods of Fallout 1 and 2 were the best available at the time.
The methods of Fallout 3 were probably the best available at the time.
The game will keep changing as technology changes.

» Fri May 27, 2011 4:28 pm

Tell that to Sid Meier; he'd probably laugh in your face. You're free to have your own opinion, but don't be surprised if I strongly disagree with you. The reason turn based games aren't as common anymore is because the industry has gone completely mainstream, and publishers and investors are only interested in a profit margin and thus they refuse to fund "niche" games. It has nothing to do with turn based games being "outdated".

As an avid Civilization fan, I admire the man - he's done quite well in taking the turn based system and gradually streamlining it to the point it almost feels like an RTS, or at least, makes the system bearable.

» Fri May 27, 2011 6:59 pm

i didn't. my statement is obvious with the slew of sandbox real time combat RPGs that have been released since oblivion (RPGish).

Like...?

and like i said even square realizes this since a honcho over there mentioned that they were looking as western studios as a platform for the next final fantasy. hell FF12 is a blatant examlpe of even the japanese getting jumping on the wagon

FFXII is a single-player MMO made by many of the people who worked on FFXI, it's an example of a company jumping on the MMO bandwagon, not the FPP RT RPG bandwagon.

the point is that old school turn based systems only existed because they didn't have the capability of producing fun real time RPG battles, its outdated and lazy to produce an "RPG" with turn based battle in 2009

Interplay had the capability to make Fallout RT, it was a conscious decision not to, as with most RPGs from the 90s. Hell, there were RT RPGs in the 90s so you're really just making stuff up and claiming it to be fact.

The reason turn based games aren't as common anymore is because the industry has gone completely mainstream, and publishers and investors are only interested in a profit margin and thus they refuse to fund "niche" games. It has nothing to do with turn based games being "outdated".

It has more to do with the big companies not willing to fund anything but high budget games (thus trying to get huge gross profits) than it does with profit margin (Net profit/revenue). Appropriately budgeted games aimed at a niche audience can have as big of a profit margin as blockbusters, probably even bigger if they're really successful.

As an avid Civilization fan, I admire the man - he's done quite well in taking the turn based system and gradually streamlining it to the point it almost feels like an RTS, or at least, makes the system bearable.

In what way is Civilization anything even resembling RT? It's completely, totally, and utterly TB. It's less RT than Fallout which you could at least say feels kind of RT when you're watching your enemies take their turns.

» Fri May 27, 2011 4:28 am

We've seen screenshots. It's the same as Fallout 3...

» Fri May 27, 2011 5:03 pm

Funny, I feel similar about Fallout 3. Anyway, it would be best if you could switch between FPP/TPP/isometric like in Dragon Age, and between turn-based and real-time like in Fallout Tactics and the canceled Van Buren. This way everyone would be happy. But they don't have time to implement that.

No one would want it to be 2D, this is just silly. Van Buren, the canceled Fallout 3 by Black Isle Studio, made by many of the makers of Fallout: New Vegas, was 3D and yet had gameplay style just like FO1/2 (aside from letting you choose between turn-based or real-time modes). However, it would be great if there was a top-down camera option, like in Dragon Age.

This - and while we are dreaming of something that there is no time for, add the FO Tactics squad screen too.

» Fri May 27, 2011 7:42 pm

No one would want it to be 2D, this is just silly.

What's "silly" is speaking for everyone. Myself and many other fans of the originals would actually prefer a new game done in the style of the originals. While I'm not weeping alone at night because the likelihood of this happening is less than an asbestos cat chasing a paper dog in hell--I still stand by the fact that part of what makes Fallout "Fallout" to me is the engine and gameplay.

» Fri May 27, 2011 8:11 pm

FO1 FO2 are great games i still play them once in a while.But with no doubt there isnt going to be 2D.

» Fri May 27, 2011 10:57 am

FO1 FO2 are great games i still play them once in a while.But with no doubt there isnt going to be 2D.

Is 2D asked for?

» Fri May 27, 2011 4:29 am

What's "silly" is speaking for everyone. Myself and many other fans of the originals would actually prefer a new game done in the style of the originals. While I'm not weeping alone at night because the likelihood of this happening is less than an asbestos cat chasing a paper dog in hell--I still stand by the fact that part of what makes Fallout "Fallout" to me is the engine and gameplay.

Actually the original Fallout 3, Van Buren, was in 3d, yet done in the same style as Fallout 1 and 2. You could rotate your view around and see all items from all angles. I played the tech demo, it was pretty cool.

» Fri May 27, 2011 8:11 pm

closed for clean up.

*no reason to reopen this. The perspective has been decided and is known. There is no reason to continue with the same flames and flamebait that occurs each and everytime this is discussed on the forum. Folks know what perspective they enjoy playing and can find and buy games geared to their tastes. This one is FFP/RT. :shrug: