Fallout Retrospective Comments by Keza MacDonald

@Abscido

'But here is a better explanation of what I'm trying to say: CRPGs are about levelling and loot. A CRPG world should, first and foremost, accommodate levelling and looting. In a world where characters are drawn 'believably', they are also expected to act and react accordingly. But a CRPG that allows for proper player freedom - like NPC killing, theft, god-killing, rule-bending, etc - could never really co-exist with properly, emotionally 'fleshed out' NPCs.'

I have the feeling we are using the same term to describe two very different categories of games.
One is based around loot and levelling. Examples include diablo 1 and 2, as well as world of warcraft and any of korean online games (they are not called grinders for nothing, you know). Although proper name for this kind of game is Action RPG, or perhaps action adventure, since Space Siege falls into this category but is not set in fantasy setting typically associated with roleplaying games.

Then there is second type of computer games. They are computer roleplaying games that are descendants of pen and paper roleplaying games, and those games thrive on story, with all its elements such as memorable characters, dialogues, choices and consequences and interesting narrative. Character advancement and looting are present in those games also, but they are two of many elements making such games. Examples include planescape: torment, fallout 1/ 2 and to lesser degree baldur's gate and kotor.
Saying that believable character can't exist in computer roleplaying game without detracting from experience is true if you think of games like diablo or morrowind, where game world serves only as thinly veiled justification for player to hack and slash his way through everything on his or her quest to gather mountain of loot. Of course, such games never really deal with important thing: consequences of player actions. Bethesda is especially guilty there, with their notorious babysitting of player (and feeding him regurigated pulp of: chose A: you are good, chose B, you are bad...You chose B, are you really sure? Really? Maybe you reconsider? Oh well, you chose B, but don't worry, it won't stop you from experiencing everything the game has to offer).
That's why I don't consider oblivion, and to certain extent morrowind as roleplaying games, understood as games driven by story and creating believable world where players actions are treated seriously, and not as a cosmetic detail.

PS.
And to show what I mean about bethesda games being poorly concevied messes in terms of creating any kind of immersive and believable world (where consequences of player actions needs to be considered and included, like in planescape: torment or fallouts, here's link to youtube clip showing a bit of oblivion: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KN7cKO8-P0

I really loved the first fallout games, but then I really loved oblivion too.

Does this mean I win?

Yes. It also means you avoid having to write thousands of words on the internet justifying your choices. You definitely win!

Does this mean I win?

I love Jelly, and I love Rollercoasters, but I don't want to go on a jelly rollercoaster!

But hopefully you will love it. I'm hoping a big side effect of this is that more people venture out and pick up the originals....

P.s, are random encounters still part of the game?

Gametrailers made the video Fallout Retrospective http://www.gametrailers.com/player/42026... 2 days earlier. So who is copying who? Or Bethesda payed you both? Kching?

Yes. It also means you avoid having to write thousands of words on the internet justifying your choices. You definitely win!

Heh, well you know me and Morrowind Kris! I can't help myself. :-D

@Silvervein

I think we've kind gone off track, unusual for an online discussion. ;-p I was originally reacting to a point made about Bethesda's poor writing and said Morrowind's plot and characters were perfect for the kind of world Beth were trying to create. I've already said that Oblivion was very poor on that level.

You're right, we are talking about two different types of game at heart. The Elder Scrolls are a genre unto themselves in a way, while the likes of Torment (a true classic) and Fallout are really interactive storybooks with the illusion of choice, though that illusion is more comprehensive in Fallout. You claim that player choice and the consequences of actions make for a true CRPG ... but where then do Fable II and GTA IV come into the equation? The former has far more action-consequences than Torment, which basically only let you go down the 'cerebral' or 'muscle-man' route if I recall.

I'm not a fan of Diablo or WoW whatsoever, or any other game that deals solely in the loot/levelling premise I mentioned without the right atmosphere and plot to back it up. However, that doesn't mean I want to sacrifice freeform gameplay, of which Morrowind is truly king, for the sake of a smaller world, a streamlined plot and player choice 'outcomes'.

If I spend 15 minutes 'real time' walking across the island of Morrowind, only to find a door that's too high to reach, and locked at 75 out of 100, I can still (at level 1) find a way to levitate there and open it, accessing an area supposedly beyond my reach. I can become a character that sweet-talks people into information; I can fly; I can kill every NPC in the world; I can become a werewolf with the expected consequences; I can play the good guy, the bad guy, or the fickle guy (my personal favourite - save a guy's life, then axe him ;-p). In a world where all that and more is possible - and based on stats and choice of character type - the NPCs need to be somewhat simpler.

EDIT: Bloody Morrowind, making me crazy again. :-D

I never played the Fallout games, even though I picked both of them up at a bargain bin in HMV many years ago.

Wasteland, though, I played obsessively when it first came out in 1988. Brilliant game.

I, along with many others, would also like to point out how unremittingly shite F3 will be, despite the fact that:

a) I haven't played it.

b) I haven't played the originals

c) I don't like Bethesda, which makes me an outstandingly neutral observer

d) I struggle to find two neurons to rub together

I completely agree, MrZ. I hope it has a few areas that are more like that.

The desert in Fallout 3 is by no means uniform. There's actually a surprising amount of variety in the different parts of the map.

*digs out spiral-bound Fallout 1 manual*

He is not the 'Vault boy'... page 4-19 identifies him as the 'trademarked Vault-Man'. Well done the wiki lot for getting it wrong.

I am avoiding (and have avoided) all the trailers and previews since the Vault-Tec advert trailer as these things have a horrible habit of spoiling the game with their fast-cut clips and hint dropping.

As an extremely old school Fallout fan (I discovered it via the beta/demo that I got off Happypuppy.com back in 1997) I'm extremely interested to see how they interpret Black Isle's universe. Silvervein's comment regarding the changing of the appearance of so many objects really worries me - after all, stuff like the 10mm pistol, MP9 SMG and Plasma Rifle (which is so large you carry it slung at your hip, as opposed to held to your shoulder) are iconic. It would be rather like making a new Star Wars film set during or after the original trilogy, and changing the look of the Stormtroopers' rifles.

I'm also eager to see if the marvellous conversation system of Mass Effect has had any impact - playing Oblivion and talking to people after Mass Effect justly feels like a huge step backwards. Will improvements have been made (after all, the original Fallouts had a conversation a lot more akin to Mass Effect than Oblivion's 'Hey, you are the hero of Vault 13!' 'I heard that Dr Atomic knows how to move in Power Armour' 'That's what I heard') or not?

Oh well. Three days to go...

Fallout 3 will my first taste of the series. I don't think I could play the dated-looking PC versions of the first two games now but I think I would have enjoyed them if I'd played them when they were released.

Hey Keza! You obviously played Fallout and Fallout 2 (and even Wasteland, my favourite game of all time!), how would you rate Fallout 3? This current review tells me nothing since it's the same guy that gave Oblivion 10/10..

Aaargh, I can't help myself!! How can someone miss the level scaling (the real game killer, in my opinion), the grating NPC's, the broken AI, the sameness of all the dungeons, the incredibly repetitive hell gates, the horrible character development system (yes, you need to put all your most used skills in the MINOR categories), the lack of hand-placed objects in the world, the linearity of the quests (always ONE solution), the idiotic conversation mini-game, etc, etc, etc.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KN7cKO8-P0

10/10..

If we're asking questions of the author, should we ask why we're implored to go and play the original games on the final page, yet we've had the final villain of the first game (and two of the three ways to deal with them) spoiled for us the page before? The discovery of and encounter with the Master should be a shocking surprise, as even the few clues you're given throughout the other parts of the game don't give you anything close to the full picture of what you'll find.

I'd be further tempted to say that the original game was far more combat oriented than the sequel - while it was possible to do many of the puzzles without fighting, you needed very high stats to do so and even then success was not as guaranteed as it was with gunplay. The diplomacy route, for example, was extremely limited compared to the other suggestions (sneaky and fighty) while a jack of all trades character would struggle while in the sequel they had a much easier time of it.

Oh, and huzzah - the two giant flash banners that surround the page make my browser run so slowly I'm reminded of the C64 word processor we had in school - type a sentence and then sit back for a few seconds while it catches up with you.

Metalangel: Firefox + Adblock Plus. I haven't seen a banner in years.

Nobody bought the original games? What the hell? Who is this misinformed retard?
Do you realize Fallout still sells today, and can be even found in stores and from several online distributors?

Goddamnit, the stupidity of some people.


Nobody bought it... jeez...

Fallout 3 will my first taste of the series. I don't think I could play the dated-looking PC versions of the first two games now but I think I would have enjoyed them if I'd played them when they were released.

No need to worry! Actually I can't imagine 'better' graphics for Fallouts. It ages well. It's timeless. The only problem nowadays is that 640x480 resolution doesn't look good on LCD. If you can hook up your PC to CRT, do it. When you pick up more powerful weapons and start delivering critical hits, any complaints about graphics disappear.
Hell, don't 'think', just go play them. You know, these words:

They are games of fundamental importance to anybody who cares about how good writing can transform interactive experiences, and that's one of the reasons that they've proven so enduring; because Fallout's impact wasn't dependent on its technology, you can play them now and experience the exact same emotional impact that they had when they were first written. And you should.

are by no means exaggeration. The best of what PC gaming has to offer awaits you. It's called Fallout and Fallout 2.

By the way, no need to play these excellent games in 640x480: High Resolution Mods!

Fallout: http://www.nma-fallout.com/forum/dload.p...
Fallout 2: http://www.nma-fallout.com/forum/dload.p...

They work wonderfully, with only a few weird glitches (nothing gamebreaking).

And what do you think, when people who have completed first or second Fallout 70 times (there were such cases reported; it's not your average computer game at all) managed to do so? 'When they were released'? Hardly likely.

mkreku: I was at the unveiling of Fallout 3, and when I saw that demonstration I very nearly had actual tears in my eyes, because it looked just like it did in my head when my imagination embellished the original games' sparing graphical representations of the wasteland in my head. I've played Fallout 3 a lot in the run-up to release, and my impression of it has been unfailingly positive. However. It is a Bethesda reimagining of the universe, not a sequel, and so it is very much a Bethesda game more than a Fallout game. I loved Oblivion, for all its faults - it's one of my favourite games of all time - and so a Bethesda-Fallout marriage is an absolute match made in heaven for me. But I have a strong suspicion that if you really did hate Oblivion, you might resent Fallout 3 for its resemblances to it.

That said, I would say that few of your complaints about Oblivion count for Fallout. The character development system is SPECIAL and skills, like the original Fallout, which is much better. The enemies aren't scaled, there are no repetitive hell gates, and I'm sure that much of Fallout 3's word has been hand-placed and designed with real care. I can't speak for the later dungeons or the AI or the believability of the NPCs (although I suspect they might still be the game's chief weakness), but I know the quest design is very different. It gives you real options, and the decisions that you take close off other avenues of opportunity, unlike in Oblivion. What Fallout 3 definitely does get right, in my experience, is the wasteland atmosphere, the desolation, the sense of worthlessness and grimy isolation. I'm hugely looking forward to spending sixty-odd hours in that game's company.

metalangel: Given that this is a retrospective, it's rather expected that we should be reflecting upon the series' best moments. I don't think that knowing about the Master would in any way spoil the Fallout experience for a new player, not when there is just so much to enjoy. Knowing the plot of a famous book doesn't affect the enjoyment you get from reading it.

Excuse me for being persistent.
Fallout never was all about graphics, yet visuals are part of its charm. You may find them ugly, but this ugliness suits the world perfectly. To quote Kino no Tabi:
The world is not beautiful... And that, in a way, lends it a sort of beauty.
That's how philosophiliac I am.

Thank you, Keza. You made me pre-order it.

Edit: Oh, and for the record: I didn't hate Oblivion, I was just really disappointed in it after reading the glowing reviews it got everywhere. I also think it's one of the first few games where Eurogamer has been dead wrong in its score (compared to my taste). Bioshock is another example.. where you even got me to pre-order the Collector's Edition! It was NOTHING like System Shock 2.

Er... in what sense was it not like System Shock 2? The virtually identical plot, the crazed and ragged mutant enemies, the hackable security systems, the fact that the final third is rubbish, the audio logs... Oh. You meant how, unlike Bioshock, System Shock 2 was GOOD.

Great Article.

Played FO2 and FO Tactics, just hoping they install the 'feel'of the PC games which was uterly absorbing.

+ with loads on Miniguns, sniper rifles , shotguns etc with 6 different types of Ammuniiton for each :)