|
Really hoping Guy Fieri can become a part of Fallout 4 somehow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 14:46 |
|
|
Cream-of-Plenty posted:Todd Howard recently described Fallout 4's intended gameplay as a "pinata of micro-experiences". this post could be the dictionary definition of poes law
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
Cream-of-Plenty posted:Todd Howard recently described Fallout 4's intended gameplay as a "pinata of micro-experiences". It is a bad analogy but I get where he is coming from and it really does boil down to preferences. On SA, a lot of people here really love their WRPG stories that are full of dialogue choices that matter but are otherwise on rails for the most part. I think that is what Todd Howard is referring to by the steak dinner. Then you have games like TES, Fallout, and other more open world games where everything is scattered in bits and pieces where some pieces can be much larger than others. However, I think what any developer who makes an open world bits and pieces game needs to remember is that just because those pieces might be smaller that does not mean that they shouldn't taste extremely good. I am not amongst the crowds here on SA that think that the Witcher 3 is amazing in every way but I did like it a lot for many reasons. The biggest reason is easily that they proved that story telling can be separated in many bits and pieces and still be extremely good.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
Cream-of-Plenty posted:Todd Howard recently described Fallout 4's intended gameplay as a "pinata of micro-experiences". Title of your sex tape.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
Cream-of-Plenty posted:Really hoping Guy Fieri can become a part of Fallout 4 somehow. All Matthew Perry had to do was bring a copy of Fallout 3 on a talk show, so it seems like a pretty low bar.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
So, Shamus Young has started a series of articles critiquing FO3's main plot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
nice, i really enjoyed his articles on the shortcomings of various fallout 3 and skyrim quests
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
not that I don't think putting the sequel 200 years hence is a bit unnecessary, but the argument that culture would have moved on from the 50's in 200 years seems a bit silly, since the first game is set in 2161, which was around 200(!) years after the style and sensibilities of the 1950's had existed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
I want to note, I don't think I was able to kill a single feral ghoul reaver in 3, they just hit so hard and had so much health. The Broken Steel enemies are bad and it was painful having played the DLCs being at level 30 and having to go through that Vault behind Little Lamplight because almost every enemy was a Super Mutant Overlord and finding an albino radscorpion in the overworld made the entire game just stop while I walked backwards, or climbed on top of a rock or something to shoot at it for a minute. Yeah, NV has 3 beat with the whole DT thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
An unrealistic thing about the games is that it's been centuries since the war yet the world hasn't started regenerating. The Capitol Wasteland should have plenty of vegetation by the time of Fallout 3. Hiroshima and Nagasaki today are thriving cities, and Chernobyl has plenty of life in it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
They wanted a nuclear desert wasteland and they also wanted to set it in DC, but Bethesda apparently has a rule where every game has to be set after the last one, and they wanted to call it Fallout 3, so it also had to be set after Fallout 2. Their hands were tied, really.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:09
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:I don't think anyone could argue with a straight face that New Vegas' map was better than Skyrim's or even close to it I can.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:11
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:An unrealistic thing about the games is that it's been centuries since the war yet the world hasn't started regenerating. The Capitol Wasteland should have plenty of vegetation by the time of Fallout 3. Hiroshima and Nagasaki today are thriving cities, and Chernobyl has plenty of life in it. You could say the same thing about Fallout 1. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
closeted republican posted:You could say the same thing about Fallout 1.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
closeted republican posted:You could say the same thing about Fallout 1. Ehhh it's also set in California, home to droughts and fires on its own.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:17
|
|
|
yall old world blues wrote the book on bullet sponge enemiesGroovelord Neato posted:I can. dont be ridiculous. new vegas was a boring rear end empty desert. Blue Raider fucked around with this message at 23:20 on Jun 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:An unrealistic thing about the games is that it's been centuries since the war yet the world hasn't started regenerating. The Capitol Wasteland should have plenty of vegetation by the time of Fallout 3. Hiroshima and Nagasaki today are thriving cities, and Chernobyl has plenty of life in it. None of those are applicable if you assume Fallout is set after a doomsday war. The skies may have been blacked out and it could have been long enough to render all but a few plant species extinct. The Japan bombs would have been a blip in comparison, and Chernobyl wasn't even a nuclear blast it's just radiation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
bitcoin bastard posted:this post could be the dictionary definition of poes law Yeah, it's actually pretty eerie. So anyway, I've been thinking a lot about what the actual setting for this game might be like. Yeah, yeah, Boston and the Institute, I know, but there was a hell of a lot more to the last couple games than just DC and Vegas and I'm wondering what the rest of Massachusetts might be like. The way they talked about the "Commonwealth" in FO3 left it rather ambiguous as to whether it was just a regional designator like "the Capitol Wasteland," a political group like The Enclave, or a true nation state like the NCR, but it still gives me hope that this game will be set in something resembling an actual country, even if it's a divided one. I mean, obviously there will still be a wasteland (even the NCR is mostly a desolate hellhole) and there will be raiders and outcasts and weird isolated communities -- hell, the Commonwealth proper might turn out to be just a small part of the map -- but I'm still hoping with can get a game world where the culture and society is at least as coherent as Skyrim was. I mean, FO3 was mostly just a bunch of shitburg villages whose only link to the outside world were a handful of wandering traders. All the towns had been founded within living memory, none of them had any sense of purpose or permanence, there is no food source aside from a few brahmin or industry besides scavenging, and most of the interesting NPCs had wandered in from somewhere else. There's little or no local culture aside form various Old World cargo cults (A-bomb shrine, nuka-cola shrine, founding fathers shrine, Lincoln shrine, etc.), and the main plot revolves around two outside factions that barely give a poo poo about the locals. It's weird but, even though Bethesda set it in their own backyard, no one in the Capitol Wasteland seems particularly connected to pre-war DC/Virginia (most don't even have the right accents), and none of these communities seem to have much of a future, either. Megaton is irradiated to hell, Rivet City is falling apart, Tenpenny Tower is worthless and decadent, Big Town, Arefu, and Canterbury Commons have like 10 people between them, and most of the other little settlements are too laughable to mention. Everyone's either just trying to survive or content to pick the corpse of the old world and it makes the whole choice of whether to save them or kill them seem rather pointless. Here's hoping that FO4 will give us a world worth saving.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
nuzak posted:not that I don't think putting the sequel 200 years hence is a bit unnecessary, but the argument that culture would have moved on from the 50's in 200 years seems a bit silly, since the first game is set in 2161, which was around 200(!) years after the style and sensibilities of the 1950's had existed. The idea is that the 1950s aesthetic and sensibilities continued until 2077 instead of everyone's style and politics rapidly evolving every decade. Fallout 3 just went way, way further with the 50s aesthetic than any of its predecessors and made the 50s the defining feature of Fallout's post-apocalyptic world. The big issue with Fallout 3 having a 1950s post-apocalypse is that it requires the world to be completely stagnant AND imitating the pre-war world for 200 years. 200 years ago, we weren't even at the Industrial Revolution. Even a nuclear apocalypse shouldn't destroy society to the point where the world just stops right where it is for centuries. Fallout 2 certainly knew this, since it showed full on towns and cities emerging and the most advanced civilizations being nearly pre-war in their tech level and wealth. Then Fallout 3 has the Capital Wasteland as a handful of scrap-built communities of two dozen people each and fighting over irradiated water while dressed as Greasers and vowing to fight communism.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
2house2fly posted:Bethesda apparently has a rule where every game has to be set after the last one Baron Bifford posted:An unrealistic thing about the games is that it's been centuries since the war yet the world hasn't started regenerating. The Capitol Wasteland should have plenty of vegetation by the time of Fallout 3. Hiroshima and Nagasaki today are thriving cities, and Chernobyl has plenty of life in it. I actually thought the Capitol Wasteland being mostly dead could have worked well with the "we need clean water to bring life to the land"-thing. The problem though was that Bethesda never really did anything with their own story premise. At no point during the whole game did I get the feeling that the wasteland actually needed clean water. Everyone seem to be doing fine without it after all. And an even bigger problem is that the dead wasteland made for rather lovely visuals. The biggest visual improvement mod for FO3 I installed was one that added grass and trees all over the place.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:31
|
|
|
Blue Raider posted:yall old world blues wrote the book on bullet sponge enemies They make a desert and call it peace.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:32
|
|
|
2house2fly posted:They wanted a nuclear desert wasteland and they also wanted to set it in DC, but Bethesda apparently has a rule where every game has to be set after the last one, and they wanted to call it Fallout 3, so it also had to be set after Fallout 2. Their hands were tied, really. It's really impressive how they managed to tie their own hands behind their back. Do they have double joints or something?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:34
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:I remember that a DLC had this pistol you could get from the Burning Man that dealt more damage than a basic minigun. Because it was balanced that way? The Mini-gun fired some of the weakest rounds in the game, but said ammo had some the highest DT penetration in the game; so while other guns had to rely on high alpha damage to beat enemies with high DT, the Mini-gun with it's high penetration and high rate of fire can utterly destroy some strongest enemy from insane unblockable DPS. I mean, it's almost like they wanted to have a weapon that was strong in it's own right, but not in way that it completely overshadowed other weapons' strong points. Weird. 2house2fly posted:Does a single shot from a minigun do more damage than a single shot from a pistol in real life? I have no idea but it seems like it would. real life is different from game balance though of course. Depends on the gattling gun, most just fire rifle rounds, while some fire .50 BMG rounds, and while fire stuff in the 30mm range.
Back Hack fucked around with this message at 23:54 on Jun 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
Does a single shot from a minigun do more damage than a single shot from a pistol in real life? I have no idea but it seems like it would. real life is different from game balance though of course.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
Lord Lambeth posted:It's really impressive how they managed to tie their own hands behind their back. Do they have double joints or something? No but they are sometimes that incomprehensibly stupid. I get that they may want to stop any confusion or a situation where they start retconning things but that kinda already happens. I've never noticed that in the Elder Scrolls games as they all look the same. Also there's no real world equilivent to compare to. But in a game that has actual Earth years it just look really strange. If they want to reboot this and just make it thier own. Fine. Just get it over with then...
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:I can. because it was
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:59
|
|
2house2fly posted:Does a single shot from a minigun do more damage than a single shot from a pistol in real life? I have no idea but it seems like it would. real life is different from game balance though of course. Generally it would probably be the minigun, but that could feasibly not always be the case. Kinetic energy is "0.5 x Mass x Velocity squared" , and while you generally expect higher velocities from "rifle" or "intermediate" rounds like you'd expect a man-portable minigun to fire, there are certainly situations where a particular rifle round would be outperformed by a crazy "pistol" round. It's all very scientific.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
I think the CW is still a wasteland which hasn't regrown is attributed to the radiation in the water, but maybe I'm wrong about that? Is it ever mentioned? I know that in F:NV they say that radioactive water is killing off plants so I would assume that is also the excuse for why the CW hasn't regrown much vegetation. It's not good science, in fact I think it may be totally incorrect, but it's the only thing I can recall about it. I did a science project when I was in elementary school. I took 3 bean sprouts. One I left alone. A second I bombarded with microwave radation. A third I bombarded with X-Ray radiation (My father's a dentist, x-ray radiation was easy for me to get ahold of). All 3 were buried at the exact same depth in soil taken from the same bag of dirt, given the same amount of water (measured via eyedropper) and placed side-by-side on the same windowsill when not being tested. The x-ray radiation plant grew fastest. Then the microwave one, while the 'control' bean grew slowest. I don't know what the effects of Gamma radiation on plants would be, but given that Chernobyl is not a desert I would imagine that the whole 'Radioactive water is killing the plants' thing that FO3 and New Vegas both say is overstated if not outright wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 00:09
|
|
|
2house2fly posted:They wanted a nuclear desert wasteland and they also wanted to set it in DC, but Bethesda apparently has a rule where every game has to be set after the last one, and they wanted to call it Fallout 3, so it also had to be set after Fallout 2. Their hands were tied, really. The funny thing is that they made Point Lookout, they understand most of the East Coast would return to marshy or outright swamp environments the European settlers and first Americans lived in. The more northern parts above D.C./Virginia territory would obviously be more entombed in toxic ice with lingering patches of Nuclear Winter combined with already colder climates. There should be giant mosquitoes that try to liquidate an entire human or Boars the size of Rhinos. There is too much water for the area to become arid, if anything the Capitol Wasteland should be fighting off toxic flooding or the radiated crabs they at least added in. That's what should make massive Water Purification important or using the FEV to just elevate the land up to fight it off, there is radioactive water everywhere and it needs to be dealt with so people can stay in one area for a long enough time to build. But Bethesda wanted this and it wanted something simple like the old game so that's how it is.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 00:11
|
|
|
Eh, criticizing Fallout 3 for having a mostly dead wasteland instead of a fertile one seems a bit silly when seemingly every post apocalyptic game and movie gets it wrong. Not to mention it's really drat spergy. Fallout 3 does have legit problems like why anyone in their right mind would want to build a settlement around an unexploded nuclear bomb that could go off at any time while having no reliable way to sustain themselves in the wasteland as they lack agriculture but criticizing the science of Fallout 3 is silly considering the series has had magic radiation, a magic virus that would put Resident Evil's T-Virus to shame, laser and plasma guns, robots and advanced AI and the like, that's just spergy nitpicking. The culture argument Shamus makes doesn't really make too much sense either even though I usually agree with his articles, culture grows from new ideas being assimilated from people of different cultures themselves alongside technological advancements. But when you're stuck in a Vault for two or more generations, culture will be stagnant like the gene pool so greaser gangs forming in Vault 101 makes some sort of sense as the vaults were fitted with the technology and cultural ideas of 2077, including holotapes and whatnot. Outside the vault, there isn't that much of a huge emphasis on 50s culture. You could argue that a place like Rivet City, filled with the DC Wasteland's top scientists should have invented new ideas and technology though, but it is implied that The Institute in Boston have done exactly that and that's what you'll explore in Fallout 4. If anything, New Vegas was the game that had the stagnant culture. Given how long the NCR has been running and expanding by that time and given the residents of New Vegas, you'd think they would have moved on from the old Las Vegas culture.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 00:29
|
|
|
The Strip was like it was because Mr. House wanted it to be that way. Before he came around, the tribes running the Casino's had completely different cultures.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 00:33
|
|
|
The families on the Strip started out as uncivilized tribals and became the families within living memory (I think even within Benny's lifetime).
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
Mr. Fortitude posted:Eh, criticizing Fallout 3 for having a mostly dead wasteland instead of a fertile one seems a bit silly when seemingly every post apocalyptic game and movie gets it wrong. Beyond this, I feel like the fallout series approach to nuclear anything and especially aftermath is pretty fantastical from the onset, largely building on the now scientifically outdated 50's expectations and fears and expecting it to work exactly as real life radiation is a little silly. Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Chernobyl might have vegetation and wildlife, but I'm pretty sure there's no ghouls-- so I'm fine with a little nuclear winter and scorched deserts, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 00:35
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:The families on the Strip started out as uncivilized tribals and became the families within living memory (I think even within Benny's lifetime). Random Great Khan NPCs will mention that they knew the Chairmen before they became the Chairmen, so it must've been pretty recent.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 00:38
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:The families on the Strip started out as uncivilized tribals and became the families within living memory (I think even within Benny's lifetime). It was really recent, yeah. The Securitrons showed up (probably beat them up a fair amount) and made an offer. Benny tells you about it if you let him.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
khy posted:I think the CW is still a wasteland which hasn't regrown is attributed to the radiation in the water, but maybe I'm wrong about that? Is it ever mentioned? I know that in F:NV they say that radioactive water is killing off plants so I would assume that is also the excuse for why the CW hasn't regrown much vegetation. It's not good science, in fact I think it may be totally incorrect, but it's the only thing I can recall about it. They've explicitly said that fallout radiation does not operate under the same rules that real world radiation does. Shugojin posted:It was really recent, yeah. The Securitrons showed up (probably beat them up a fair amount) and made an offer. Benny tells you about it if you let him. Benny mentions shanking the dude who originally lead the chairmen too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
Anyone curious about what's known about fallout's Europe should probably just read this http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Resource_Wars It's likely just as much or worse of a wasteland than the US
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 00:41
|
|
|
Mr. Fortitude posted:The culture argument Shamus makes doesn't really make too much sense either even though I usually agree with his articles, culture grows from new ideas being assimilated from people of different cultures themselves alongside technological advancements. But when you're stuck in a Vault for two or more generations, culture will be stagnant like the gene pool so greaser gangs forming in Vault 101 makes some sort of sense as the vaults were fitted with the technology and cultural ideas of 2077, including holotapes and whatnot. Outside the vault, there isn't that much of a huge emphasis on 50s culture. You could argue that a place like Rivet City, filled with the DC Wasteland's top scientists should have invented new ideas and technology though, but it is implied that The Institute in Boston have done exactly that and that's what you'll explore in Fallout 4. It could probably also be argued that wasteland society in FO3 and to a lesser extend FNV is strongly influenced by the prospectors/salvagers, as right now recovering working tech seems more highly valued than creating new tech. Which sort of ingrains a mindset of 'This stuff from this culture is good' and helps keep that culture relevant to society. Once we start seeing new inventions, creations, et cetera being valued more than recovery of old tech then we'll see a drastic culture shift.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 00:52
|
|
|
nuzak posted:not that I don't think putting the sequel 200 years hence is a bit unnecessary, but the argument that culture would have moved on from the 50's in 200 years seems a bit silly, since the first game is set in 2161, which was around 200(!) years after the style and sensibilities of the 1950's had existed. I think when people say this (I've seen the argument in a Fallout thread here on the forums too) what they're really saying is "I don't like the aesthetics or music from the 1950's, therefore they should tone it down to suit my personal tastes". The retro-future, dimestore novel pulp feel is now, for better or worse, inextricably tied to the series. Although in that article it seemed more like the writer was just sperging about the fact that it was 200 years removed from the world ending and yet culture hadn't changed from pre-war times. While I kind of agree, it doesn't really bother me since I really can't imagine the series without that element. It would be like a Mad Max movie without the bondage gear, V8 cars and guzzoline. Even 200 years later, after Max Rockatansky is dead I'd still expect tribal societies with megalomaniacal leaders wearing scary masks and studded leather and chrome.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 14:46 |
|
|
khy posted:It could probably also be argued that wasteland society in FO3 and to a lesser extend FNV is strongly influenced by the prospectors/salvagers, as right now recovering working tech seems more highly valued than creating new tech. Which sort of ingrains a mindset of 'This stuff from this culture is good' and helps keep that culture relevant to society. Once we start seeing new inventions, creations, et cetera being valued more than recovery of old tech then we'll see a drastic culture shift. It's also the chief problem with the Brotherhood of Steel, they hoard old technology but refuse to actually do anything with it or innovate or improve upon it while they slowly die out as new cultures are stepping up and beginning to overtake them technologically.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 01:01
|
|