Todd doesn't get it

Odin

Odin

Carbon Dated and Proud
Admin
Mr. Teatime of DAC informed me of a Fallout quote from the October issue of Computer Games, it's none other then Todd Howard talking about Fallout 3, here's what the man said:<blockquote>"We always talked about doing another RPG, something different then The Elder Scrolls, that held the same things true that we love - player choice, open-endedness, great characters and such. So we would always talk about doing something like Fallout because we liked it so much"

The game is being developed alongside the next Elder Scrolls game, and will be available on PCs and consoles as well. There is not much to reveal yet about the game's storyline, but its SPECIAL character system, and it's gritty drug-and-prostitute-speckled irreverence is still at the core: "I don't plan on tempering it. I think we're looking at a hard M (rating). The biggest challenge is "to create something for today's market that has the same impact that Fallout had on gaming in 1997."

"I'd say the impact the original had in its day was about so much more then the angle you viewed it at, or how combat was executed"</blockquote>Ack, Todd get it straight.. Let's not go where Chucky went, m'kay..
 
Well, give him a chance. We still don't know that much about what they plan to do besides wanting to reach a broader market via console and PC - they're a business first and they have to approach the project looking for the biggest payoff. If it's good, it should sell. It won't please everyone, but that's an impossability anyways. I would love nothing more than to see F3 be like how we were doing it at BIS, but I have to be realistic. Bethesda is trying to make F3 their own at this point, but still try and maintain the Fallout "feel." I, and I'm sure a lot fo other people, may not like some of their design decisions, but I'll reserve my final judgement, as a fan, when the product ships. I'm willing to give it a chance, especially at this point where most of the talk is just that; talk.
 
"I'd say the impact the original had in its day was about so much more then the angle you viewed it at, or how combat was executed"

Wow. You didn't have to take psychology, or even be a perceptive person, to see what he's getting at.

Sounds to me like they have already made up their minds on more than they are letting on to.
 
Well, I agree with Puuk. We do need to give them a chance. Seriously, even if BIS had finished it a lot of us would still find ways to compare it to the originals and complain about something. Look at it this way, it can't possibly be another FO:PoS can it???
 
Yeah but you didn't need to say that did you. Let me have some hope of getting a worthy sequel.
 
You know, it's funny that people are optomistic of compromises, possible or otherwise, before a title is developed, yet in hindsight it's quite easy to see why certain game series have failed. I don't know, maybe it's a little too common sense for me, but I think the time to be concerned about the entity is before it's been shot and skullfucked. Well, they would have to dig up Fallout a second time for that, so...yeah.

I don't follow the hype game, because that is the game of ol' Bruno of Atari, though he was illuminating the problem many have been blissfully unaware of, ironically enough. It seems like he was taking down his "fellow" Frenchmen when question was raised about his own problems in regards to EtM. I will agree that they all deserve the notoriety, and the hype market has to be shaken.

Fans used to be able to generally expect a game's sequel to be something like the original for the reason that more people would gravitate towards that series over time. Along with Bruno's confession, the cross-platform design marketing belief only works for certain game types (FPS, Strategy, Action, and some Adventure sub-genres). After that, it is all a myth. When game design is compromised because it must be simple to port, then it does take away from the presentation of the game. Fallout is a game where presentation was important from the first damn time you saw that cigar rocket circle the globe.

Puuk, EA had the same line, song, and dance as you've just said about another series. Guess why Ultima died? Or how, for that matter, that kind of mentality killed off Origin, too, but Bethesda doesn't have to really worry about that kind of problem.

I can understand innovation; I can understand technological advancement' I can understand differing development styles.

All of that has JACK SHIT to do with design integrity, which every series-following person cares about deep down. It is also what makes or kills series off. You don't get return customers if the previous customers really don't like the new offering.

There is a place and time for marketing departments to have some reason for breathing, and that is to get initial press out and to keep the name circulating The use of the more specious of marketing lines is just insulting.

"I'd say the impact the original had in its day was about so much more then the angle you viewed it at, or how combat was executed"

I'd hate to humiliate him now because he sounds like such a a happy, gushing puppy, but the entire impact of the original WAS the presentation and the styles used. (Unfortunately the words "happy, gushing puppy" makes me think my boots are getting pissed on.) Deviating from them to match everything else makes no sense from a design standpoint, unless you're just a cheap bastard. The "impact" he speaks of wasn't felt much because Interplay didn't support it as well as it should have, and it ended becoming a favorite of those who used to play/still play tabletop/P&P RPG and combat games. It made more sales over tiem than by any other means, maybe because word-of-mouth spread after the release of the sequel. The response to the spin-offs was then watched more closely and taken down by word-of-mouth having "teeth-on-jugular".

So, if you're going to say you're giving someone Fallout, you might as well give them what they expect of Fallout. It's a funny concept, but it just might work. Take it on faith, or as Ex-Asst. Janitor Danien of BIS used to call it, "empirical evidence". Funny, there seems to be a LOT of it.

I didn't say this for the behalf of anyone on this forum, but someone needs to break the bad news to Todd.
 
Wow, that was not only an excellent post but an eye opener as well. Who can argue with that post? Thank you for that Roshambo. As you know I came here with an optimistic view on Fallout related things and as I saw some view points here, my view point began to change drastically. Your post was the icing on the cake. My question is, what do we do about this? Why don't you develop Fallout 3? :wink:
 
I wonder what kind of impact thousands of letters would have? I'm not talking about email that they can mass delete, but actual enveloped letters. Sent to Bethesda and its Parent company.

You have to physically pick up, open, begin to read and then throw away a letter if it's something you don't want to read. I don't mean this as an inconvenience or just a way to annoy them, either.

I think the letters should be extremely thought provoking and passionate. Like the things Roshambo has written.
 
Lost Metal said:
I wonder what kind of impact thousands of letters would have? I'm not talking about email that they can mass delete, but actual enveloped letters. Sent to Bethesda and its Parent company.
Click to expand...

They can mass burn those.
 
I'm not going to comment on these quotes from Todd, because he clearly shows that he doesn't get it..
 
"I'd say the impact the original had in its day was about so much more then the angle you viewed it at, or how combat was executed"
Click to expand...
Shit!!! That's it! It confirms it. Damn!!
Ok, the combat system is not the only important thing in fallout game, but it will spoil it so much if there'll be shitty morrowindish fps crap or even worse, active pause. Oh I hate it so much.
And what's the point in keeping SPECIAL then. It's only good for TB. Doesn't they get it?
Oh yes, they do not.
The biggest challenge is "to create something for today's market that has the same impact that Fallout had on gaming in 1997."
Click to expand...
I sure don't see anything like that possible.
''Todays market'' doesn't like fallout and vice versa. Even in 97/98 both fallout games weren't particulary good for ''that day's market''. Today, it's either you make fallout game, either you make the game that's good for ''today's market''. Those appeals can't be merged in one project.
 
The hard "M" rating he is shooting for is what the game needs. There is no other rating for thie game to have. I don't see how he is in anyway going the way of "Chucky."
 
Epidemic said:
The hard "M" rating he is shooting for is what the game needs. There is no other rating for thie game to have. I don't see how he is in anyway going the way of "Chucky."
Click to expand...
The "M" rating wont save the game, just look at POS.
 
yeah, it doesn't nessacerely mean well-thought dialouges and such, it can also mean whoring it out :roll:
 
Oh God...I can feel my stomach tense up...

HOWEVER! He did say he would keep it "M" rated. Now true that could mean he could put a bunch of lame cussing and violence or use it like in Fallout to express meaningful, but harsh things...we just have to wait and see...

Expectantly,
The Vault Dweller
 
He didn't actually said that combat and perspective weren't important, rather, that there were things other than combat and perspective that were important, and that I agree with.

I do hope, however, that those two elements won't be neglected or mishandled.
 
Survival Horror-esque?! :wtf:

Am I the only one visualizing a Bethesda suit chucking Morrowind and their new Cthutulu game into a blender and pulling out Fallout 3?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top