The first details on Bethesda's Fallout 3 have emerged from the latest issue of US Game Informer magazine.
The long-awaited sequel runs on an evolved version of the Oblivion engine, although Bethesda says it's reworked the third-person view because of negative feedback from its last role-player.
Fallout 3 kicks off with your birth and your mother's death in a vault hospital. This is where you get to create you character as your father (voiced by Liam Neeson) hands you over to the DNA analyser, before removing his mask to reveal similar traits to the ones you picked.
According to Game Informer, the battle system in Fallout 3 is called the Vault-tec Assisted Targeting System (V.A.T.S.). You'll certainly be able to tackle enemies in real-time using first-person shooting, the article says, but V.A.T.S. lets you pause time and select a target at your leisure.
This works using action points, which when used up will leave you with only real-time fighting until they charge back up again. If you're not in to all-out killing, Bethesda says you'll also be able to play through the game by being stealthy, or even talking your way out of trouble.
Enemies can target you using the exact same targeting system, so you'll get injured in very specifics points on your body. In addition to this is a new health and radiation system, which lets you measure how radiated water and other consumables are before you use them.
Fans will be pleased to hear that the Karma system is making a return, and there are 9-12 possible endings based on your actions. If it's even half as good as Oblivion, this should turn out to be something very special indeed.
If it's half as good as Oblivion, it won't be very good at all. I read that every time you perform a gory kill, i.e. a headshot, it goes into slow motion. : / Let's hope Bethesda don't completely ruin it.
The original 2 were better than oblivion offering greater interaction, more freedom, multiple endings, Better skill tree albeit with p**s poor graphics. To be fair everything this article just described sounds fu**ing awesome. Can't wait, it's gonna be a good 2 years coming up for games with the quality thats round the corner on every format.
Sounds fantastic indeed. They're suitably modernizing it while keeping the elements that made the originals great. I'm so glad the franchise ended up in the very capable hands of Bethesda. They'll do an excellent job.
The combat basically sounds like it uses a bullet time system (with APs dictating how long you can slow down time for). Not exactly optimal (in fact I'd say it has the potential to be an abomination), but it could be acceptable if combat is not used as a gameplay crutch (as in previous Bethesda titles). I'll reserve judgment for now.
The multiple quest solutions aspect would be a positive, if I could trust it being true. Exactly the same thing was said about Oblivion (and Morrowind), and the number of quests with multiple solutions could be counted on one hand.
Definately like the idea of having region specific injuries (though FO did have this system, so it's not exactly a step forward). I'd be interested to learn whether these injuries can have (semi)permanent affects to the player stats, as in the original or whether it's just a Deus Ex style HP per area system.
Multiple endings is a definate plus. I wonder if it's a single MQ ending, with different outcomes for choices made in settlements, or whether there are multiple choices that lead to a different outcome for the main story. I've always considored Bethesdas "We don't do multiple endings, because we don't want to invalidate any one players game experience when it comes to choosing the actual canon outcome in a sequel" to be one of their biggest story writing handicaps.
Good news about the lack of level scaling.
Glad that the game isn't party based (though I'd of been very suprised if they'd of gone this route).
What, is it trendy to slag off Oblivion these days?
Could really be given it's own thread, but for starters these two reviews pretty much sum up my own experiences:
Review 1
Review 2
Overall I'd say a good way of putting it would be that it's an attractive game for most people, but a pretty poor RPG.
The combat basically sounds like it uses a bullet time system (with APs dictating how long you can slow down time for). Not exactly optimal (in fact I'd say it has the potential to be an abomination), but it could be acceptable if combat is not used as a gameplay crutch (as in previous Bethesda titles). I'll reserve judgment for now.
The multiple quest solutions aspect would be a positive, if I could trust it being true. Exactly the same thing was said about Oblivion (and Morrowind), and the number of quests with multiple solutions could be counted on one hand.
Definately like the idea of having region specific injuries (though FO did have this system, so it's not exactly a step forward). I'd be interested to learn whether these injuries can have (semi)permanent affects to the player stats, as in the original or whether it's just a Deus Ex style HP per area system.
Multiple endings is a definate plus. I wonder if it's a single MQ ending, with different outcomes for choices made in settlements, or whether there are multiple choices that lead to a different outcome for the main story. I've always considored Bethesdas "We don't do multiple endings, because we don't want to invalidate any one players game experience when it comes to choosing the actual canon outcome in a sequel" to be one of their biggest story writing handicaps.
Good news about the lack of level scaling.
Glad that the game isn't party based (though I'd of been very suprised if they'd of gone this route).
What, is it trendy to slag off Oblivion these days?
Could really be given it's own thread, but for starters these two reviews pretty much sum up my own experiences:
Review 1
Review 2
Overall I'd say a good way of putting it would be that it's an attractive game for most people, but a pretty poor RPG.
100% agree with you. The first review summed it up perfectly.
What, is it trendy to slag off Oblivion these days? It was a f**king great game. Get your heads out of your asses.
Erm, no I just found that Oblivion was a major let down, especially in comparison with the previous Elder Scrolls games. A fun game to some degree, yes, however it contained an incredible amount of annoyances; the levelling system and the GUI to name a couple. The game was linear, incognito. When compared to the far superior Morrowind and Daggerfall, I find this quite obvious. The game was absolutely beautiful, and had some fantastic moments, but overall in my opinion Bethesda royally f**ked the Elder Scrolls series right in the ringer. I'm not jumping on any sort of bandwagon, I've said this since I played through the game; I was heavily disappointed.
Come on people - Oblivion was a major step forward in general RPGing. There has never ever been a game that allowed such freedom (apart from the previous Bethesda games) whilst keeping a strong story throughout. Admittedly the voice acting did get a little annoying after 10 hours or so of playing, but then if 10 hours is just the tenth of the whole game I'm not the oine to complain. Besides, Oblivion was easy as hell to mod, providing almost infinite amounts of extra content. Can you imagine what Fallout will be like if thousands of fans add their own content???!!!! And finally - Oblivion is now almost 3 years old (and will be 3 - 4 when Fallout comes out), so I would say that I assume Beth will polish out all the niggles and create enough content to fill a brand shiny new blu-ray or whatever disc. Anyhow, people say that STALKER has covered the ground that Fallout covers, but if F succeeds where S failed I would only be happy - another game in a post nuclear setting! Goes off to play old Fallout.
Come on people - Oblivion was a major step forward in general RPGing. There has never ever been a game that allowed such freedom (apart from the previous Bethesda games) whilst keeping a strong story throughout.
How can oblivion be a major step forward if it's not an improvement over previous bethesda games? It's the same old stuff, it just got more hype this time and prettier graphics. A nice game I have to admit but notting really outstanding. The lifespan and freedom are great but the story still sucks and the character system is outdated. Bethesda promised they were going to overhaul the combat system but it turned out to be the same hack&slash experience.
Come on people - Oblivion was a major step forward in general RPGing.
I'd be interested to here how. There are three (count them) character archetypes (he who hits, he who shoots fireballs and he who sneaks), there is no ability to express character through dialogue, quests offer nothing in the way of player choice (despite them being promised), your actions have no imapact on the wider world. All Oblivion is good for is playing make believe with (as the game offers no feedback, you have to imagine it all) and personally that really is of no interest to me.
There has never ever been a game that allowed such freedom (apart from the previous Bethesda games)
Ultima VII, Arcanum, PST, Fallout, Darklands. All of them open ended, and all of them provided real choices to the player which all impacted the gameworld and future opportunities presented to the player.
whilst keeping a strong story throughout.
Personally I found the story pretty generic (though I admit this is obviously down to preference). Evil Foozle invades the world and must be destroyed - why I've never seen the likes before.
Admittedly the voice acting did get a little annoying after 10 hours or so of playing, but then if 10 hours is just the tenth of the whole game I'm not the oine to complain
Well not only did it get annoying, but it meant that the amount of spoken dialogue had to be significantly reduced. Bethesda games have never been the most wordy of RPGs (unfortunately), but Oblivion was a new low for them. How many times are you actually presented with a choice mid-dialogue?
Overall I could cope with Oblivion being a fairly mediocre title, if not for the fact that it is held up as the second coming of the messiah.
It is an improvement over the previous games. Ok, so Morrowind was more realistic with the walky parts and the stilt riders (or whatever they were called), but it got annoying when you realized you forgot to pick up a sword of ragnabosom and had to waste another 15 mins walking somewhere and getting the bug taxi all over again.
I think the character system is great. Again, possibly personal preference, but definitely better than the previous elder scrolls games. I think it is fair enough to only being able to upgrade stats in the skills that you used. It's no good shooting everyone with a grenade launcher (or the medieval equivalent) only to upgrade your spear skill. However, at the same time, it is far less restraining than previous ES games. How many times have you ended up fighting vastly superior enemies in Daggerfall, just because you gained lots of experience from running???
The combat system has been overhauled too. If you don't agree play the other games again.
I agree, the story isn't anything special, but apart from Fallout, (which I think are the best RPGs out there) stories, however you dress them up, are essentially the same in all RPGs. (Including Deus Ex, before anyone tells me its not the same).
Many quests do offer choices, but I agree, more would have been better. Concerning character classses - how many do other RPGs have?? From my experience - mage, warrior, ranged unit. Or some such names for them. Even in Fallout, although not having strict character classes, it boiled down to big guns / small guns / melee. I think that's three (Quote: "Count them".
Yes, there are more open ended games out there, but not more open. The Oblivion world is truly open for exploration right from the beginning.
I think the voice acting added to the game. You are not going to watch films just with subtitles, imagining what the actors sound like (and before you start - you wouldn't even watch a sh*t film just with subtitles).
There needs to be a balance between fun and realism in games and I think Oblivion has got pretty much spot on.
Barely. Some things improved but many other things were downgraded and most remained the same.
I think the character system is great. Again, possibly personal preference, but definitely better than the previous elder scrolls games.
Eh? Better than the previous installments? It's basically the same clumsy leveling system they've been using since 1994 (which in turn was inspired by FFII). And it's still a very limited hack&slash combat experience that goes as deep as a mud of pool, just like the rest.
I agree, the story isn't anything special, but apart from Fallout, (which I think are the best RPGs out there) stories, however you dress them up, are essentially the same in all RPGs.
Now that's what I call a poor excuse. Maybe you should play some other rpg's.
The whole concept of an urgent invasion in a freeroaming game is laughable unrealistic. And so are the NPC's and the road bandits wielding expensive glass swords and daedric armor and at the same time trying to rob 50 gold pieces from travellers.
The way I see it, the biggest complains about the previous elder scroll games which happen to be the poor, uninspiring main story, the bugs and the whole combat/levelling system have remain unchanged.
Modders making more natural and altogether more balanced leveling systems to choose from so you can just play the game without worrying about leveling or micromanaging stats at all .... that's priceless. Way to go bethesda.
OK, so what's a better levelling system? please don't tell me you prefer a D&D style one? This is very intiutave in the fact that for your character to get better at something you need to practice that particular range of skills.
The hack&slash has actually been introduced only this time round. Before it was just like any RPG - you press the hit button and the dice roll. In Oblivion, at least, some actual human skill is involved.
As regards to the bandits - there's a mod that removes creature levelling for some creatures. However, in a game of that scope and freedom it is a requirement, just to allow for a smooth experience. If auto levelling didn't exist, half the time you would stumble into areas populated by hugely powerful creatures before you have enough experience. Again, personal taste I think, but I would prefer a free roaming game with auto-levelling creatures, rather than a spoon fed one.
Lastly, suggest me an RPG then that doesn't have a great evil trying to ruin the world your character lives in.
OK, so what's a better levelling system? please don't tell me you prefer a D&D style one? ... The hack&slash has actually been introduced only this time round. Before it was just like any RPG - you press the hit button and the dice roll. ... Lastly, suggest me an RPG then that doesn't have a great evil trying to ruin the world your character lives in.
You, sir, lack experience as I've seen 1) dozens of leveling and engaging combat systems that are better than bethesda's semi-uncontrolable character progress (and yes, D&D are one of them) and simple hack&slash gameplay 2) lots of RPG's that don't require the player to save the world from evil forces
To give some examples, the overall goal of planescape torment is to recover the main character's lost memory, to discover both his identity and why and how he has become immortal. This leads to tracking down his lost mortality, separated from him and given a life of its own by the "flawed" ritual that made Nameless One immortal. Now THAT's what I call a story.
Another great game is Terranigma where a boy from the underworld who accidentally opens pandora's box must resurrect the world, as well as all the lifeforms on it. The ultimate goal of Secret of evermore is to escape from a fantasy world and return to your hometown. In KOTOR you can choose between saving the world from the sith or becoming one yourself to conquer the univers.
My fault. Planescape Torment is an awesome game. However, still I am not convinced that D&D is anywhere near as dynamic as the Beth system. And Hack & Slash, as you refer to it, is a welcome addition of actual human skill in a game. Even Planescape required a lot of "target enemy, wait for dice to roll a hit". Repeat.
KOTOR is presicely the same. It is justr dressed a little. But, yes I do agree that Oblivion doesn't have the best story. However, it provided a much better overall experience. As is represented by many *professional* awards that it has won. And I don't mean because it got to the top of the HMV charts
OK, so what's a better levelling system? please don't tell me you prefer a D&D style one? This is very intiutave in the fact that for your character to get better at something you need to practice that particular range of skills.
Daggerfall. Okay so there are some skills not featured in Daggerfall (Armour skills for instance), but the range of skills means that if you attempt to be proficient in all areas you'll end up a jack-of-all-trades, master of none (which is really one of the main aims/challenges in creating an improve by use system). In contrast, in Oblivion (and Morrowind) there is little you can do to avoid being a master of all skills (which tends to limit replay, especially coupled with the static world). Daggerfall's Advantage/Disadvantage system is infinitely superior to the Morrowind/Oblivion birth sign system, as well. Is there any chance of being able to create an character who woships a specific Aedric god, and thus cannot wear daedric armour but does get bonuses to casting spells during the day, in Oblivion or Morrowind (without just using your imagination)?
TBH it is very very difficult to get a improve-by-use system right, though I do agree it can, if done well, remove certain logical fallacies inherant in the XP systems. It isn't done well in either Morrowind or Oblivion though.
The hack&slash has actually been introduced only this time round. Before it was just like any RPG - you press the hit button and the dice roll. In Oblivion, at least, some actual human skill is involved.
The TES series has, on some level, always been an action RPG, so I don't necessarily see the introduction of the new combat system as an inherant disadvantage (certainly there needed to be something done about Morrowind's). However the choice to make your stats affect only damage done does have it's own disadvantages (mainly in serving to invalidate choices made in selecting weapon proficiency). From the review posted above:
"Needless to say, 15 points of damage are more then 8 points of damage but when you always hit, it's only a matter of time (and health potions). At some point I ran into a bunch of Faded Wrath thingies that were immune to my glass sword of prettiness, I reached for my trusty staff of pretty, but deadly lightnings, and discovered that I forgot to recharge, thus establishing the parallel between me and my fictional character (I usually forget to charge my cell phone). I went through my entire, inconvenient as the back of a Volkswagen (that's a Mallrats reference), inventory and found a mace of magical awesomeness. My Sword skill was about 80, my Blunt skill was about 20. I prepared to die bravely, but since the developers knew that that would have made me upset and lowered my self-esteem, they made sure that even with no skill I'm still a formidable opponent. The Wrath thingies had to face my, well, wrath and were wiped out without any damage to my precious self-esteem. Yay!"
As regards to the bandits - there's a mod that removes creature levelling for some creatures. However, in a game of that scope and freedom it is a requirement, just to allow for a smooth experience. If auto levelling didn't exist, half the time you would stumble into areas populated by hugely powerful creatures before you have enough experience. Again, personal taste I think, but I would prefer a free roaming game with auto-levelling creatures, rather than a spoon fed one.
Well that isn't necessarily relevant when you considor that most free roaming RPGs have a system of auto-leveling in the difficulty of creatures, it's just that the system that Oblivion used was particularly poorly implemented (something openly accepted by Bethesda themselves). I personally always found that the biggest mistake was the loot leveling (especially if you're going to make a large portion of your gameplay dungeon raiding).
Lastly, suggest me an RPG then that doesn't have a great evil trying to ruin the world your character lives in.
Daggerfall again. I know what you're saying though. To me it wholly depends on implementation. Arcanum, for instance, features the cliche "You are teh choosen one" story, yet it's still managed to be told with a fantastic level of intrigue and mystery. I'm about halfway through Arcanum right now, and I'm still not entirely sure what's going on (or whether I am actually TEH CHOSEN ONE). You know the basic premise of Oblivion from the point when Picard dies (except some minor philosphical points inserted by lore master Michael Kirkbride).
All I care about is the view of the game!! I know everything else is going to be the same or similar.
I just want something in between first person and the "RTS" view (or sky view). I don't want a FPS and I don't want the old view way up in the sky. I think a third person thats a little distance from the character would be perfect!
It looks interesting. BUT IT'S TWO YEARS AWAY!!!!!
So I will wait and see if it EVEN COMES OUT ON PC! At the end of the day, in 2 years the PC could be a dodo. So far this year we have managed C&C 3 and Supreme Commander, and in October we will get Crysis and Bioshock. Not exactly an avalanche of AAA titles, is it? If it gets much worse, Fallout 3 will be the ONLY AAA titles released in 2009!!!
I thought we were getting Unreal Tournment this year as well. And Bioshock. And Age of Conan.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
.
