What do you want in fallout 3?

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

Guest

Guest
You've all said you don't want on-line or first person (I agree, especially with the first person one.) but what ideas do you peopple have for fallout 3?, not stories, but engine and how they are gonna change it from the last two
Like, a 3D engine that's all rotatable or more emphasis on survival; hunting and water
[www.C:\WINDOWS\Profiles\court\Desktop\pickies.com]
'You're not a hero. Your just a walking corpse'
Frank Horrigan, Fallout II
 
Yeah

I'd say more emphasis on surviving in a post-apocalyptic wasteland. Possibly even more so than the first one. I disliked the amount of civilization in the second one and I fear that even if FO3 is released without multiplayer or any sort of FOOL it will still be far too advanced to retain the feel the first game had.
 
RE: Yeah

Bassicly i think early game should be really uncivillized like Doyle said, but later in the game it would get civillized, moving up slowly and i hope the game is long enough to please everyone who wants one of the two or me who wants both

And as for an engine, keep it exactly the same as the first 2. Andy little extra features espically a 'Put All' button as well as take all would be useful. We just want a new game not a new engine

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]

Fang's Web Pages
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/fang
http://pub51.ezboard.com/bfangbos
http://www.Egroups.com/group/Fang_BOS


It's only cheating if you get caught
- Fang_Of_the_BOS@hotmail.com
 
RE: Yeah

[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Feb-19-01 AT 08:43AM (GMT)[p][font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Feb-19-01 AT 08:40 AM (GMT)

No new engine? i think a 3D one would improve gameplay because
1.) It would look good, especially with currant standards of grafics.
2.)it would make a change from the last two, because we don't want a C&C type thing happening, where they never change and keep pumping similar games out.
3.)There would practically be no two NPCs the same.
4.)Weapons wolud be more simple to do, like bows and arrows.
And when I say 3D I do NOT mean FPS.
HEY ROSH! what do you want in Fallout 3?
[www.C:\WINDOWS\Profiles\court\Desktop\pickies.com]
'You're not a hero. Your just a walking corpse'
Frank Horrigan, Fallout II
 
RE: Yeah

[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Feb-19-01 AT 10:54AM (GMT)[p]>No new engine? i think
>a 3D one would improve
>gameplay because
>1.) It would look good,
>especially with currant standards of
>grafics.

I agree that a 3d engine could be done. If it were done well.

Case in point, even though it's a behind-person, Alice is 3d and does a remarkable job of conveying the atmosphere.

>2.)it would make a change from
>the last two, because we
>don't want a C&C type
>thing happening, where they never
>change and keep pumping similar
>games out.

There's a difference. Fallout is good. C&C is shit. Always has been ever since they decided to not fix the LOS or the production facilities.

>3.)There would practically be no two
>NPCs the same.

Since 3d is so easy to skin, and you don't have to draw separate animation frames (frame, wire, skin, then go) then it would be of immense help. That means....guns can each have a different look rather than an SMG, rifle, shotgun, etc. Each gun would have it's own look out in the world.

Armor would be easy to be represented, and so would locational damage (e.g. heavily wounded leg, eye shot, etc.), and so would many other things.

>4.)Weapons wolud be more simple to
>do, like bows and arrows.

Agreed.


>HEY ROSH! what do you want
>in Fallout 3?

A return to a darker feel, more towards a wasteland setting. Much like how the first one was. I don't care to have all the Monty Python references and pop culture references. A couple like in the first one was okay, but it really hurt Fallout 2 with them in there. Fallout 3 can do without, and SHOULD go without a lot; a few are okay.

Fallout 3 should focus more upon the problems in the wasteland and keep a strong story, and yet at the same time, keep the 50's art that Fallout 1 had. Though, I think it's gone, sadly enough. Tim Cain and the rest there that are now working on Arcanum obviously knew what was going on; notice there's very little new retrotech (50's sci-fi pulp fiction) in Fallout 2? It's mostly recycled tiles from Fo1. Now, Fallout Tactics seems to be backpedalling seriously by adding in those effects and tiles. They still have besmirched a bit of Fallout with the Predator-looking armor, though Fallout 2 did it first (I remember the same fuss when some saw the uber-futuristic armor on the Fo2 box). I want the 50's Nuke Scare and advertising, etc. to be continued on, to go back to the feel of the first one. Sadly, it looks like the creative genius behind Fallout is gone. We can only hope those who take the wheel behind Fallout 3 do a capable job.

I'd like the mix of guns to go back to how Fallout 1's was, with a bit more of HtH and melee weapons being useful. To use a bit of the lingo of AC, thrown can also use a little 'love'. They didn't play much of a part in Fo2 aside from a few events. I liked how the .223 pistol was truly unique. You found it in Fo1, it was like an immense prize. In Fallout 2, it was dead common.

Personally, in Fo3, I'd like to see more of a character development. Sort of how PS:T let you do various things. In Fo1, you could do evil missions and such, as per survival (reference definition: Wasteland GURPS). In Fo2, that was really limited, and evil was branded for life. Mad Max was no angel, and he did what he had to do to survive. The good/evil system isn't there for looks, and Fo2 did expand upon it, but it didn't have much noticible use. Reputation should influence general locale speech options instead of just talking to the nobody filler-people. It does to a point, but not much.

I'm not going to discuss items and the such, because it would have to be decided upon by who produces it (they would be deciding upon game balance and what would be good to put in). Though, guns should be a bit more scarcer, to give them value; the feel of the game should be more dark, desolate (the feel of Fallout 2 seemed like it wouldn't have mattered much if there was grass or trees around everywhere), expand upon the wasteland setting to give it meaning; more character development and involvement into side organizations if you choose - not talking about a Daggerfall guild system, but more along the thieves' guild in Fo1 was sort of like, and doing jobs for the Sheriff in Redding; more involving quests, the ones in Fo1 were often vague, and you had to chase the leads down like with the water chip - kudos on that one - the ones in Fo2 were a bit more Fed-Ex, partially because I think they didn't have enough time to work on what mattered because they were busy fiddling around with extraneous bullshit.



Um...might want to change the below. It's not a proper URL. There's a file upload in the script that you can use and paste the URL in.

>www.C:\WINDOWS\Profiles\court\Desktop\pickies.com
>'You're not a hero. Your just
>a walking corpse'
>
> Frank Horrigan, Fallout II
>
>
>
>


[font color=orange]
--------------------------------------------
Dennis Leary stole my song! That...asshole!
--------------------------------------------
"Robert, your time has come!"

"OOOH! Thank you, Master!"

"Don't mention it."

*Robert explodes in a shower of sparks*
--------------------------------------------
It's me, Jack Brown! The wind-up ass-hole!
--------------------------------------------
http://www.geocities.com/jonaac/2.jpg
 
RE: Yeah

>There's a difference. Fallout is good. C&C is shit. Always has
>been ever since they decided to not fix the LOS or the
>production facilities.

I hope you are not bad-mouthing Tiberian Dawn (not Sun, I'm talking about the first game in the series), because if you are, you're in for a serious flame war.





[img align=center" src="//redrival.com/aptyp/ftclogo-t.gif]


[font color=#FF0000]
No trash-talking, lower-case prone, ignorant, self-centered, 'in-your-face', 'i-am-always-right-so-you-can-suck-my-dick', 'shit-for-brains' idiots allowed.
 
RE: Yeah

Soo, you do realize that according to your logic in Fallout 3, 4, or 5 there will inevitably be skycrapers, working highways, airplanes and man on the Mars? Or am I reading you wrong?

And why the hell nobody says anything about the prequel?





[img align=center" src="//redrival.com/aptyp/ftclogo-t.gif]


[font color=#FF0000]
No trash-talking, lower-case prone, ignorant, self-centered, 'in-your-face', 'i-am-always-right-so-you-can-suck-my-dick', 'shit-for-brains' idiots allowed.
 
RE: Yeah

Prequel? Like before the War or before the first game when the world was still badly radiated?
And Rosh, I know C&C is Shit.

'You're not a hero. Your just a walking corpse'
Frank Horrigan, Fallout II
 
RE: Yeah

[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Feb-19-01 AT 11:43PM (GMT)[p]Before the first Fallout but after the war, of course. But it doesn't mean like first couple of years after the nuclear strike. I was talking about maybe ten to twenty years before F1.

And please stop saying "C&C is shit", I'm getting very nervous here! :-)





[img align=center" src="//redrival.com/aptyp/ftclogo-t.gif]


[font color=#FF0000]
No trash-talking, lower-case prone, ignorant, self-centered, 'in-your-face', 'i-am-always-right-so-you-can-suck-my-dick', 'shit-for-brains' idiots allowed.
 
C&C and sequels:

C&C is a prime example of Sequels Gone Horribly Wrong.

When we say that C&C is shit, it's most likely everything after the original. The original was one thing.

When they decided to keep the same unit imbalance, construction system, and very shitty LOS...all throughout their 'series', then it's truly pathetic.

Every new game is just a shinier, shittier version of the game before. No attention has been given to the actual flaws in the engine at all, quite namely the unit production at several buildings at once or the LOS system.


That is why Westwood was hyping the hell out of RA2, is because they do know those who like a balanced game won't play it when StarCraft and TA have set new landmarks to judge RTS games by. The units are imbalanced, and the LOS is a pure joke, no two ways about it.

Go to PCGR.com and see where everyone who liked the game just praised it rather ambiguously, yet I tear RA2 and Westwood completely apart and reveal the latest remake of C&C in a technical and complete manner.

[font color=orange]
--------------------------------------------
Dennis Leary stole my song! That...asshole!
--------------------------------------------
"Robert, your time has come!"

"OOOH! Thank you, Master!"

"Don't mention it."

*Robert explodes in a shower of sparks*
--------------------------------------------
It's me, Jack Brown! The wind-up ass-hole!
--------------------------------------------
http://www.geocities.com/jonaac/2.jpg
 
RE: C&C and sequels:

I stopped paying close attention as soon as you said you were talking about the sequels. :-) I'm not into RTS much, and given a choice whether I should buy RPG or RTS I would... say 'nah' and keep my money :-). Seriously, I liked first C&C for its mock reflection of real world, and I can't find any big flaws in gaming (again, I didn't play much RTS, I'm not that demanding). I didn't see anything like that in RA, TS or RA2 (it gave me a few laughs, though), so I don't really care about them. Go back to your blaspheming, please :-).





[img align=center" src="//redrival.com/aptyp/ftclogo-t.gif]


[font color=#FF0000]
No trash-talking, lower-case prone, ignorant, self-centered, 'in-your-face', 'i-am-always-right-so-you-can-suck-my-dick', 'shit-for-brains' idiots allowed.
 
RE: Yeah

yeah, thats not a bad idea because the radiation would still be around and civilisation would be a few radiated ramshackle shanty towns. that would satisfy the survivalist feeling.
what do you think a a more complecated food system, where if you didn't eat every 13 hours or so you lost health. Not like in Fallout one where you lost two whole health! More like 25hp.
Where do you think it should be set?
I was thinking the east coast because it would probably have been peppered with a-bombs.


'You're not a hero. Your just a walking corpse'
Frank Horrigan, Fallout II
 
no offence but but graphics for fallout shouldnt be changed
i hope most people will agree. its not the graphics that will change the game but more of what could we add to change the game
like more cars or the technology to build one or do i want to be a gang leader and crime boss or do i want to become an outlaw
bounty hunter and get paid to kill bad guys or should i become
sheriff and run crooks out of town those types of choices change the game please true gamers play for the style even if lacking in graphics so please focus on other details before graphics

thanx for yer time
intrepination
 
if theynhad a 3D engine- You could have more npcs easily, It would be really easy to make new skins, weapons and if it was done right it would look incredible. you could keep from the smae perpective though, have the same interface, except with the possibility to zoom, rotate and stuff. every single weapon could look different, your player could have his own face, not just a blur that you can barely see. it wouldn't delute the gameplay.

'You're not a hero. Your just a walking corpse'
Frank Horrigan, Fallout II
 
You preach it!

>C&C is a prime example of
>Sequels Gone Horribly Wrong.

C&C Tiberian Sun ranks as one of the most classic games in my book. Not only were the plot and themes of the game extremely well done, the graphics, characters, movies, EVA and sounds all fit perfectly. I still use the look of C&C's EVA movies in some of my Flash animations (like Poseidonet).

The sequel.. Tiberian Sun.. that was pure shit. The plot was bad, the game was slow, the multiplayer capability was SOOOO shoddy.

>When they decided to keep the
>same unit imbalance, construction system,
>and very shitty LOS...all throughout
>their 'series', then it's truly
>pathetic.
>
>Every new game is just a
>shinier, shittier version of the
>game before. No attention
>has been given to the
>actual flaws in the engine
>at all, quite namely the
>unit production at several buildings
>at once or the LOS
>system.
>
>
>That is why Westwood was hyping
>the hell out of RA2,
>is because they do know
>those who like a balanced
>game won't play it when
>StarCraft and TA have set
>new landmarks to judge RTS
>games by. The units
>are imbalanced, and the LOS
>is a pure joke, no
>two ways about it.

Westwood actually proclaimed the end-all unbalanced "super weapons" were actually a "feature" to make the game more fun. Supposedly the games were supposed to be quick and grand.

They seriously need to take a look at Blizzard, who has their act together. They aimed towards balance in ALL aspects, and when it came to Starcraft, they were able to do it for three entirely different races.

Not only that, but despite Battle.net's idiosyncracies, Westwood Online can't hold a burned out candle to it.

Have you actually tried playing Red Alert 2 online? It TRULY sucks. For no reason the game will suddenly show that there is a connection error but show that EVERYONE has perfect latency. Then there are the random program errors which boot you from the entire game, usually at choice moments.

Also, Westwood has neglected the single-most fundamental tool for creating replay value for their games, even if they suck: A map editor. Not since Red Alert (and that editor sucked) have they provided a map editor for their games. idSoftware knows this, Blizzard knows this, and practically every other RTS game maker knows this: Map makers are key to promoting your games among the fans.

You can go to Battle.net and play newly made Map-Settings maps in Starcraft. Not only do they allow the users to take control of the game, but they bring a whole different LEVEL to the entire game. For instance there are racing games, "Paintball" games, Team Fortress, Armageddon, Save the Queen, Insane, Blood, etc. They're completely different, aside from units, from the original gameplay.

Westwood is floundering with their games and it is only a matter of time before they dry up.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
RE: Yeah

It would be nice to have it on the East Coast, and not only because I live there :-) The biggest problem will be, IMO, the difference between F1 and F3. First of all, there is no desert on the E.C. Second, if I'm right, East Coast is more densely populated than California, lots of small towns etc. At best it will look like a giant junkyard, half-buried in trash and debris rather than sand. I have no idea whether it will look good or not.





[img align=center" src="//redrival.com/aptyp/ftclogo-t.gif]


[font color=#FF0000]
No trash-talking, lower-case prone, ignorant, self-centered, 'in-your-face', 'i-am-always-right-so-you-can-suck-my-dick', 'shit-for-brains' idiots allowed.
 
see when you said 3d and rotatable i thought you were refering to third person veiw like vimpire redemption or sanitarium so clearly i wasnt thinking right forgive me for that
so with a new 3D-engine would the processor speed have to be faster then fallout 1&2 or would i need like a gforce you know the requirments what would they be but i do like the idea
of new skins and more face slection and weaps,armour ect...
well a lot of people want a fallout-online why not have it be like diablo in a way have the rpg side with out having to be online and play the fo univers online and gain in skillz an actual game where pking is surviving and dieing would be salvation now thats a game well no cry babies of course

"thoughts conceived by nightmare and birthed at the site of your death" thanx for yer time intrepination
 
>well a lot of people want
>a fallout-online why not have
>it be like diablo in
>a way have the rpg
>side with out having to
>be online and play the
>fo univers online and gain
>in skillz an actual game
>where pking is surviving and
>dieing would be salvation now
>thats a game well no
>cry babies of course

Why bother have Fallout then?


[font color=orange]
--------------------------------------------
Dennis Leary stole my song! That...asshole!
--------------------------------------------
"Robert, your time has come!"

"OOOH! Thank you, Master!"

"Don't mention it."

*Robert explodes in a shower of sparks*
--------------------------------------------
It's me, Jack Brown! The wind-up ass-hole!
--------------------------------------------
http://www.geocities.com/jonaac/2.jpg
 
[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Feb-22-01 AT 02:17PM (GMT)[p]Not everybody watches football and WWF 'matches' on TV. Not everybody plays online games. Not everybody thinks Diablo was good online. Not everybody ignores the bold green text that says mentioning of Fallout Online is unwelcome.





[img align=center" src="//redrival.com/aptyp/ftclogo-t.gif]


[font color=#FF0000]
No trash-talking, lower-case prone, ignorant, self-centered, 'in-your-face', 'i-am-always-right-so-you-can-suck-my-dick', 'shit-for-brains' idiots allowed.
 
i made a sugestion now not all ideas are good i mean diablo did suck because it became to easy to hack and i geuss i failed
to think why the made tactics ok just let me ask would you like
to see more technology like as in cars or more armour choices
and weapons and i would like to know how you feel about the drug addictions add more drugs or keep it like fo 1&2 so all i want to know is how would you change fallout 3 if your not open to some ideas even if the suck maybe id like to see an all online game of fallout where life would be choice and not of predetermined endings think about not being bounded by rules or
orders just free will and its concequnces
 
Back
Top