I've played the demo...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

Guest
Here is what I thought of it (as if anybody really cares).

If your looking for a Fallout game I belive it is here, now wait and let me explain before you kill, gut and skin me. Fallout is NOT the RPG system, it is the enviorment and story, that is, what makes Fallout Fallout is the way it portrays the post-apocalyptic world and the excellent story. Any game can have a post-apocalyptic setting but Fallout portrays that setting so supurbly that it sets itself apart. This games retains that excellent post-apocalpytic portrayal that I have come to expect from any game that has the title Fallout. As for the story I don't know much about that yet so I can't judge.

If you are looking for Fallout the RPG, look elsewhere this is definatley not it. True RPG's distinguish themsleves from other games in two fashions, one is In-depth character/NPC interaction, the other is in depth character development. It seems from thsi point that FO:T has very little character interaction and I cannot jusge the character development yet. But, that is what this game is, this game is NOT an RPG it was never supposed to be an RPG, it is a Tactical Strategy (redundant?) Game. The people that are looking for an RPG should not be playing this, and they should not expect that this game has very little RPG characteristics. It was never supposed to be an RPG.

In conclusion, From what I have seen so far this game is a Fallout, it retains (at least so far) the elements that made Fallout Fallout, that is, it supurbly portrays a post-apocalyptic setting. As I said I can't judge the story. This is not Fallout the RPG It does not have indepth character interaction and its character development cannot be judged at this point. Now that is over let me say this, I enjoyed The RPG Fallouts much more than I enjoyed this, but that does not mean I hated it or even disliked it. I did enjoy playing this but I still enjoyed playing the RPG Fallouts more.

I will probably be killed for this review.
 
I also had a fun time with the demo, its not like the Fallout RPG at all but the atmosphere is still there, definently going on my list of games to buy.

And for the person who said it was a clickfest in continuos turnbased mode, I've found that I end up planning my moves through every building so that I don't lose a person, I haven't found a place where I've played clickfest yet.
 
>I will probably be killed for this review

Don`t know why...

>If you are looking for Fallout the RPG, look elsewhere this is definatley not it. True RPG's distinguish themsleves from other games in two fashions, one is In-depth character/NPC interaction, the other is in depth character development. It seems from thsi point that FO:T has very little character interaction and I cannot jusge the character development yet. But, that is what this game is, this game is NOT an RPG it was never supposed to be an RPG, it is a Tactical Strategy (redundant?) Game. The people that are looking for an RPG should not be playing this, and they should not expect that this game has very little RPG characteristics. It was never supposed to be an RPG

Although from what i`ve seen in the boards and mags there will be more character interaction and the character development seems fun the way it`s beeing devised, i tend to agree with you, but got to play it first...

>And for the person who said it was a clickfest in continuos turnbased mode, I've found that I end up planning my moves through every building so that I don't lose a person, I haven't found a place where I've played clickfest yet.


Hmmmmm, i really hope so, at this stage i remain sceptic, to say the least...


"shichisho hokoku"
 
[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-24-00 AT 07:37PM (GMT)[p]Its only a clickfest if you don't use the sentry options and don't plan your moves, if you just go in shooting its a clickfest. Also I wish to reiterate a point, this ain't an RPG, people seem to think it is and hate because it is not an RPG, but it is not an RPG and it was never supposed to be an RPG. Its supposed to be a Strategy game. Juts wanted to reitereate that point again.
 
In my final opinion, based on its own merits, the game looks good. It has very little in common with the original Fallout (aside from the portrayal of the Post-Apoc world, the music and Pip-Boy, it has nearly nothing), but that does not matter this game is not Fallout the RPG, it is Fallout the Tactical Strategy Game and therefore should be based on its own merits not the merits of its predeccesor. And, like I said, when based on its own merits, it is a good post-apoc game.
 
How about basing it off *other* tactical games:

Compared to JA2, it's nothing to shout about, and the turn-based of X-Com: Apoc was done better. In fact, the combat system of either Fallout or Fallout 2 are better than the turn-based mode of the Tactics demo.

Just like my gripe about JRPGs, if they are going to focus on a multitude of battles they might as well do it right, then so should this, as it's focusing on battle.

Frankly, as a tactical game in comparasin to those made years ago, I'm less than impressed with this.



This redefines sucking ass...​
 
RE: How about basing it off *other* tactical games:

You must remeber though that the game isn't out yet, they still have room to add details and change things abit in the games. YOu can't really judge a game that isn't even out yet and won't be for several months.
 
That's the weakest damn excuse in the book:

[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-25-00 AT 07:28AM (GMT)[p]If it were a public beta, sure, then it might be acceptable.

But THE definition of a demo is to show off the game's capabilities. It's like a movie trailer. Make a good trailer, then the movie might or might not be good - it doesn't matter, but it's purpose is to pique the interest of the viewer with highlights. Make a shitty trailer, people are less likely to go see that movie because of it.
 
Exactly

Exactly.
And that's why many times producers prefer NO TRAILER
or NO demo at all...

It's either a GOOD DEMO/TRAILER - or none at all.

It's not a "hey look guys, check this out - it's nothing like the final game - so u can't judge us - but we just wanted to publish this to promote the game to a wider audience so we get more money..."

But that's exactly what they did.

That's what happens when you make games with australians.
j/k

Klayhamn - ThieFoRent
 
RE: Exactly

Actually thats waht happens when a large audience puts a great demand on developers for a demo and beocme restless... if anything interplay ay have had them push it out before christmas to gain a few christmas preorders... if you remeber the demo was being pushed out at an incredible pace and meanwhile they also have to keep working on the final build... besides a bad trailer may not mean anything especially in the world of games... things can change very easily...

and lay off the Australians... plz...
 
RE: Exactly

Pushed out at an incredible pace? The demo is several months late!

Like Roshambo said in this thread, it's being called a "demo". Not a "tech test" or a "public beta". This is how they intended the game to be, or what they're trying to see if we'd accept.
 
RE: Exactly

[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-25-00 AT 10:18PM (GMT)[p]HEY LAY OFF WILL YAH? THE FREAKIN DEMO OWNS A FEW OF MY FULL VERSION RETAIL GAMES AND IT SURE AS HELL BEATS THE SH%$! OUT OF ALL THE DEMOS I'VE PLAYED IN THE 17 YEARS OF MY EXISTENCE

and another thing, GOOD JOB for releasing a demo before the game is out.

most developers DOn'T release demos before a game is out cuz they're either too lazy or don't see the benefits of releasing a demo b4 the game is out.

good job on a well assembled demo!

FOT:BoS WILL BE AN AMAZING GAME

just sad 14 degrees east doesn't have the FO3 liscense STUPID INTERPLAY! If Black Isle got the liscense right now, i hope they would use the BoS engine and consult with the 14Degrees East staff.

-MadMan
 
RE: Exactly

>HEY LAY OFF WILL YAH? THE
>FREAKIN DEMO OWNS A FEW
>OF MY FULL VERSION RETAIL
>GAMES AND IT SURE AS
>HELL BEATS THE SH%$! OUT
>OF ALL THE DEMOS I'VE
>PLAYED IN THE 17 YEARS
>OF MY EXISTENCE
>

At this point, I wonder what games and demos you've been playing. They don't sound like very good games.

>and another thing, GOOD JOB for
>releasing a demo before the
>game is out.
>
>most developers DOn'T release demos before
>a game is out cuz
>they're either too lazy or
>don't see the benefits of
>releasing a demo b4 the
>game is out.
>
>good job on a well assembled
>demo!
>
>FOT:BoS WILL BE AN AMAZING GAME

Glad you're optimistic....

>just sad 14 degrees east doesn't
>have the FO3 liscense STUPID
>INTERPLAY!

No...uh...ignorant you. 14 Degrees East makes strategy games, BIS makes RPG games.

>If Black Isle got
>the liscense right now, i
>hope they would use the
>BoS engine and consult with
>the 14Degrees East staff.


Why? Agility really doesn't mean crap in the game, nor does quite a few other things they've included for some semblence of faithfulness. In the RPG Fallouts, there was a definite and noticable affect of the stats. With the CTB, the affect of agility doesn't mean a whole lot.
 
RE: Exactly

Actualy it does. But whats the point in explaining it to ya cause I can tell ya this game will make you a god and youll still bitch.
 
RE: How about basing it off *other* tactical games:

I agree that the Tunr based system needs a lot of work, doing turn based with that many people is indeed cumbersome and long, perhaps a BG type thing with a pause button and auto-pause options, I liked that a lot.
 
RE: Exactly

Chris Taylor worked on Fallout 1 didn't he? He doesn't solely make RPGs or Strategy Games. 14 Degrees East COULD have gotten the liscense for FO3, but they got one more suited to their profession (Squad Based Strategy game based in Fallout). If Black Isle was to start FO3 i'd like to see them use FOT:BoS as a basis, rip out squad based play, rip out CTB or maybe leave it and see if it works. The basis behind BoS is basically the exact same as FO1 or FO2 but graphically better and optomized.

"At this point, I wonder what games and demos you've been playing. They don't sound like very good games."

How can you expect a pre-release demo to be good? Developers just throw em (PRE RELEASE) out to get some feed back and use that feed back to make the final game better.

Would you rather NOT have a pre-release demo?

Imagine how much better TS would have been if Westwood had only released a demo. Instead of expecting something ground breaking people would have been expecting the same old when they played the demo instead of being shocked the day the game came out.

roshambo, i'd like you to give me a list of pre-release demos that are BETTER than the tactics demo

the only ones that come to mind are
Serious Sam demo/beta = crap, same old shooter
Delta Force: Land Warrior pre release demo = semi crap

you can't bitch at them for wanting some feedback can you?
-MadMan
 
RE: Exactly

[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-26-00 AT 00:41AM (GMT)[p]>Chris Taylor worked on Fallout 1
>didn't he? He doesn't solely
>make RPGs or Strategy Games.
> 14 Degrees East COULD
>have gotten the liscense for
>FO3, but they got one
>more suited to their profession
>(Squad Based Strategy game based
>in Fallout). If Black
>Isle was to start FO3
>i'd like to see them
>use FOT:BoS as a basis,
>rip out squad based play,
>rip out CTB or maybe
>leave it and see if
>it works. The basis
>behind BoS is basically the
>exact same as FO1 or
>FO2 but graphically better and
>optomized.

Uhhhhh....

All we've seen is the combat so far. So if you remove squad based play, and the CTB, what is left from the demo (or game, since that's what the game is supposed to be about!)? A wish list that being worked on and a really limited version of a TB system. So how could they use that as a basis, if it's far from done and what you've been talking about ripping out is all that was done?!

>"At this point, I wonder what
>games and demos you've been
>playing. They don't sound like
>very good games."
>
>How can you expect a pre-release
>demo to be good? Developers
>just throw em (PRE RELEASE)
>out to get some feed
>back and use that feed
>back to make the final
>game better.

However you just said it was so good...

>Would you rather NOT have a
>pre-release demo?

a public feedback alpha, perhaps.

>Imagine how much better TS would
>have been if Westwood had
>only released a demo.
>Instead of expecting something ground
>breaking people would have been
>expecting the same old when
>they played the demo instead
>of being shocked the day
>the game came out.

TS? Tiberium Sun? Is anyone still playing the add-on pack series of Westwood? Quite honestly, they're still stuck in the stone age with a disabled manner of unit creation and chintzy LOS system. They keep crowing on and on, and losing more faithful fans. RA2 wasn't much better.

>roshambo, i'd like you to give
>me a list of pre-release
>demos that are BETTER than
>the tactics demo

One that readily comes to mind would be Fallout 1's demo. Right off the top of my head. In fact, people still play it because it's so good.

>you can't bitch at them for
>wanting some feedback can you?

Feedback is one thing. Demo is short for demonstration, to show off. IF it was a public alpha or such, then it would be understandable, and from the response from them, I consider it such.
 
RE: Exactly

In other words, you can't explain it.

If you're using real time mode, agility doesn't matter for squat. There's no "sequence" stat in real time, and the APs generate so fast, there's no real point to dumping attribute points in to it. You're better off putting points in to perception, which will increase your to-hit odds.

In Fallout 1 and 2, agility and perception were fairly well balanced when it came to combat.
 
RE: Exactly

Chris Taylor worked on Fallout, but he wasn't the brains behind it. Tim Cain was the lead designer of Fallout and made the blue print for Fallout 2 if I remember correctly. The Fallout brain trust is now working on Archanum.

Oh, I can give a list of good prerelease demos. Earth 2150, Sub Titans, Fate of the Dragon, Majesty, Tachyon, and so on.

Those demos weren't attempts at "testing the waters", like the FOT demo is.

Serious Sam is called a "beta demo" for the reasons you seem to think the FOT demo was released. Most "demos" that are released to test compatability are refered to as "tech demo", "test demo", or "beta demo". Most demos that are released to try out the actual and final gameplay are called simply "demo" like FOT was. Note that only AFTER the complaints started rolling in, they said it was only a test version.
 
The demo doesn't sucks

The pause button will be added to the game. From what I seem from the demo, the CTB works fine cause I had no problems with it. To mange six ppl when a gun fight is on is hard but it usually doesnt lasts long and u cant charge head on but making small steps and providing cover for each other. No clickfest just use your brain and slowly the fight will be over. If u happen to clickfest a lot maybe u think the enemies will not see u or u didnt spot them but I seriously think it will be a great game. One good example is mission 2, the battle with the raider leader, just charge and see......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top