Multiplayer Savegame Feature in FO:T

  • Thread starter Thread starter 8-Ball
  • Start date Start date
8

8-Ball

Guest
Regarding said feature... there are pros and cons. Some say that it would be an ideal plan to have another multiplayer mode in which players clear out maps or sequences of them to gain unique items implemented into the multiplayer RPG (Namely, different colored items with different names.. like the "scary guys in neon power armor") for replayability and a competitive, replayable, and fun-to-play mode. Others say that hacking would disrupt everything, and too many would stick to titles like Diablo II for the mode to be popular. Let me outline the pros and cons.
Pros:
Draws people away from online RPG's. Nox's free expansion pack was a good attempt at doing this and did draw a large amount away from Diablo II, but not enough to do much.
Replayability, and downright fun-ness. Who wouldn't want to show off their Mark XXXVVVIII power armor to the newbie scum?

Cons:
Hacking. And why should interplay allocate comptuers simply to store character data when some "kood00dezz" will make characters out the ass. Only a "Five character per CD Key" rule would put things straight.
Those Diablo II fanatics might want guns, but they won't like turn based. CTB might still draw them in, but when they learn that ammunition is measured they'll all go back and get refunds, hoping instead for the "Punkass Minigun of the d00d"'s unlimited ammo supply.

I want to see what everyone else thinks about this.
(Sorry if I said Diablo II so much, I was high on gatorade at the time of writing it. Just be thankful my name isn't GEEZMOU.)
 
Those aren't very good cons. After all, there's a degree of cheating in every game. The only way to be sure is to play with people you know don't cheat.

Also, I see no reason why Interplay would have to make servers for Fallout Tactics. The ability to save the game on the harddrive is acceptable to me and the people I'd be playing the game with.

To remove the ability to advance characters in multiplayer just because some people may cheat is fairly stupid on Microforte's part. It's kind of like banning cars because some people might wreck them. Why ruin something for everyone just because of a few people?

Also, since you brought up Nox, what killed that game was the lack of cooperative multiplayer. Sure, some people bought it after Nox Quest was released, but most people had Diablo 2 by then. Had Nox had the coop play in there when it shipped, it probably would have sold a lot more copies. Unfortunately, Microforte and 14 Degrees East aren't smart enough to learn from Nox and think a third person ISO Quake is a good idea.

As far as Diablo 2 goes.. Bows and Javelins have ammo in Diablo 2, and weapons have "durability". You have to make trips to town to buy ammo and repair, so I doubt that would be a big deal to those Diablo 2 players.
 
That's the best you can do? "Durability and ammo just feel plain old different"?

Well, here's a difference, you'll make a hell of a lot less trips to get ammo in a Fallout game than you will to get something repaired in Diablo 2.

I doubt most Fallout players ever felt pinched for ammo except at the very beginning of the game.
 
Best I can do? You're going crazy, man! You treat every discussion like an argument! You're scaring me, Proverbius. In the name of GEEZMOU I ask you to stop the madness!
 
I write a friggin' book in reply to three of your sentences and all I get is a lousy sentence reply?!

Don't make me come over there!
 
Well your book can get burned. Ah, what's the use. Why can't we all (bar GEEZMOU) get along?
 
<< Some say that it would be an ideal plan to have another multiplayer mode in which players clear out maps or sequences of them to gain unique items implemented into the multiplayer RPG for replayability and a competitive, replayable, and fun-to-play mode. >>

Is this some sort of co-op game? Or something like Diablo where you gather cool items so you can bash the crap outof the newbies?

As far as I see it, the fun will be in having your squad face off against someone elses. With the point system (they better still be planning to implement it) you won't have impossible battles.

<< Who wouldn't want to show off their Mark XXXVVVIII power armor to the newbie scum? >>

So long as battles are point based, what does it matter? Otherwise, you'll get superboy squad against newbie squad. It's not exactly fun to be smashed into the ground, it's also not very fun to smash someone into the ground.

It would be fun to start off at a very low point value and work your way up as you play, but there would need to be some sort of cap. This way, there's no need to worry about hacking. Sure, someone might have the uber elite squad that they whipped up, and you might have your veterans of steel that you've been playing with the whole time. But, the person with the better combination of characters and better strategy will win. Not the person with the better outfitted team.

Skie
 
Hmmm... like Diablo with guns and parties? The squad-based battles sound cool and...

Hey, I think that they stole the idea of Powered Armor from the Starship Troopers book along with the idea for squad-based combat. The enclave soldiers further prove my theory by reciting lines from the book.
 
Why not allow co-op play? Coop sells with Action/RPGs. The lack of co-op certainly doesn't sell.

And playing with hackers is only an issue if you're stupid to play public games with people you don't know. Most people play these types of games with people they know.

If you want a third person deathmatch, you can use the points system. However, I can't name such a game that's actually done well like that, can you? I can certainly name games that have flopped hard by going that route.

Think about it. Who would a game like Fallout Tactics appeal to? The RPG community(including the Action/RPGers) or the Quake Community? I think if I were looking for Deathmatch or CTF, I'd go with Quake and not some 2D isometric turn based game.

Considering Archanum is coming out the same month as Fallout Tactics, and Archanum *will* allow me to play cooperatively with friends, it's not a tough call as to which one I'll buy that month.
 
<< Why not allow co-op play? >>

I never said not to allow co-op. I just wanted to get an idea of what his example was. Is he talking about co-op'ing for items (4 Players vs 1 Computer), because that sounds amazingly boring.

<< And playing with hackers is only an issue if you're stupid to play public games with people you don't know. Most people play these types of games with people they know. >>

A points system would eliminate the need for hacking. Then you could get a fair game against anyone.

<< If you want a third person deathmatch, you can use the points system. However, I can't name such a game that's actually done well like that, can you? I can certainly name games that have flopped hard by going that route. >>

A computer game? I can't think of any. Warhammer's point system works pretty well, though. I can't see how there'd be too much of a problem, since the point system can be further balanced with patches (if needed).

<< Think about it. Who would a game like Fallout Tactics appeal to? The RPG community(including the Action/RPGers) or the Quake Community? >>

I would hope it would appeal to the tactical/strategy group. The group that enjoyed X-COM, Jagged Alliance, or even Myth (yes, it is an RTS, but it has more in common with X-COM than StarCraft).

<< Considering Archanum is coming out the same month as Fallout Tactics, and Archanum *will* allow me to play cooperatively with friends, it's not a tough call as to which one I'll buy that month. >>

Arcanum is a completely different style of game. It's an RPG; F:T is a tactical/strategy game. I'm also not sure if you know, but you *won't* be able to play the single-player game co-op (like BG or IWD). Multiplayer is reserved for the games made through map editor.

It shouldn't be 'a tough call'. If you prefer RPGs you'll get Arcanum. If you prefer tactical games you'll get Fallout Tactics. If you like both genre's equally and can afford both, you might get both.

I'm going to wait to see the review for Tactics before deciding to buy. I don't have much faith in MicroForte.

Skie
 
If this were purely about tactics, they wouldn't be worried about adding the Fallout RPG throwback stuff, like perks.

Actually, I have a growing lack of faith that Interplay is willing to do something right with the Fallout franchise.
 
[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Oct-20-00 AT 10:54PM (GMT)[p]WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?!

Fallout is its own genre: FALLOUT! A true Fallout fan would make Fallout their first priority, above even "EXTREME GEEZMOU HUNTER."

Alright, I'd buy extreme geezmou hunter first....

Hmm. This poses a question. Now that I think of it, maybe Arcanum WOULD be a good choice considering all of the FO team members that worked on it... but what do Fallout fans want? A Fallout game or a game made by makers of a Fallout game?
 
I dunno. I think the perks are there to keep the Fallout feel. It also adds some variety to the game.

Skie
 
<< Fallout is its own genre: FALLOUT! A true Fallout fan would make Fallout their first priority, above even "EXTREME GEEZMOU HUNTER." >>

Fallout isn't it's own genre. I do love the setting though. Which is part of the reason Tactics sounds appealing. I also refuse to buy a game soley on the license/setting it's using. There are tons of examples of bad games with good licenses.

<< but what do Fallout fans want? A Fallout game or a game made by makers of a Fallout game? >>

I can't answer for the whole. But, I want an RPG with great story, impressive interaction, and multiple paths. I'd also rather have an isometric view. The setting or gaming system isn't nearly as important as these features.

I think Arcanum has a high chance of delivering these things. That's why I'll buy it over Fallout Tactics.

Skie
 
Not its own genre, but the fantastic motif makes me classify Fallout games as seperate from the rest.

Why do we even expect them to release both games at the same month? Interplay will release Tactics earlier to avoid getting sales stolen by Arcanum.
Hence a bugged game a la FO2.

Fast food is going to die out in California. House prices keep going up, minimum wage keeps going up. Minimum wage keeps going up, McDonald's has to compensate and make burger prices go up. Eventually, burgers have to be smuggled into California!

So is the Diablo II trade economy. All those people... they're going to have so many unique items and gems that it just isn't worth anything anymore.
 
They're different genre's...they don't have to worry about releasing F:T on top of Arcanum.

Skie
 
That depends on what you're buying Archanum for, Skie. If you're buying it to run around and kick mucho ass and build yourself up into some kind of super hero, it's competing directly with FOT. :)
 
A little, I still don't see Arcanum offering the same use of tactics.

Skie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top