New Fallout 3 screens and a crying Vault Boy

[Solwyn]

it's just too damn fun to hypothesize about crap before it comes out.

 :stunned:

That's all you have to add to my bon mots? I'm disappointed.

Elle a dit cela.
Un bon mot ne prouve rien.

[BlueCross]

it's just too damn fun to hypothesize about crap before it comes out.

 :stunned:

That's all you have to add to my bon mots? I'm disappointed.

Elle a dit cela.
Un bon mot ne prouve rien.

'She'?

[Solwyn]

Or he said.

If you're gay.

Which is fine with me, I don't judge, BC.

[Chucara]

I'd have to disagree with you on two (important to me) issues.

Auto-levels for monsters. It completely ruined Oblivion for me. I want to be mauled over when I venture into an area I'm not ready for yet. This was what made the enclave and deathclaws scary in Fallout 2.

Leveling: SPECIAL should not be changed. I can understand that the use-it-to-learn system is more realistic, but I think actively selecting skills and stats is a major part of roleplaying. The system in Fallout did get more or less broken at very high levels, but I'd prefer this to the Oblivion way. Perhaps you should unlock new skills are regular intervals so you would always have something to throw points at.

And yes, while Oblivion was probably big, fast travelling ruined immersion.

[BlueCross]

Don't we have some sort of rule about trying to underail a thread?

We should ask Chucara.  He would know.

[inso]

Auto-levels for monsters. It completely ruined Oblivion for me. I want to be mauled over when I venture into an area I'm not ready for yet. This was what made the enclave and deathclaws scary in Fallout 2.

yeah, but it also made going just about anywhere scary. i remember one game of Fallout 1 where i ran into 6 Manti on my way to Vault 15. needless to say, i gots chopped up good.

with Fallout 2 it was bad with the claim jumpers around the forested areas (yeeeah. them having M60s and you having crappy armour isn't a good combination). in Tactics, it was like that, just replace "Claim Jumpers" with "Super Mutants" and "M60s" with "Browinings". the crappy armour stays  :dead:

[Night Owl]

Auto-levels for monsters. It completely ruined Oblivion for me. I want to be mauled over when I venture into an area I'm not ready for yet. This was what made the enclave and deathclaws scary in Fallout 2.

I have to disagree here some, because the two games are very different even in this regard. Oblivion is a true "go anywhere / do anything" game. It's totally setup for that. If you want to ignore the main quest and do other stuff, go right ahead, and the game will largely play along and usually keep things just challenging enough (and the difficulty slider ensures you can still get your ass kicked in places if that's what you want.)

Fallout really isn't like that. Just because you *can* go anywhere from the start doesn't mean that's the way the game is setup. If you play the game the way the designers meant, you'd have no reason to go the the enclave or meet deathclaws until you were "ready". I realize you *can* go there right away, but if you are role playing the character / story, why would you? Yea, you can say "I'll ignore the main quest and just do side quests" (well, you can't in FO1 with the time limit) but then what are you doing? Just the sidequests without the main story to hold it together will get old fast.

I actually want to see the leveling - because then it would make the Fallout world truly freeform, which we'd all positively love.

[inso]

they took the time limit out in the main patch for Fallout 1.

[Chucara]

I actually want to see the leveling - because then it would make the Fallout world truly freeform, which we'd all positively love.

But I don't see what it's a bad thing that you can't go everywhere, as long as it isn't like GTA IV, where the bridges are closed. Having a game mechanism that makes it unattractive to go certain places just mean you can look forward to being able to go there. Also, getting killed by a level 72 rat just ruins it for me.

I really think there are better ways to do this. For example: Once you completed the first five cities, the first three could be invaded by the enclave/aliens etc. You can increase the difficulty of an area by introducing new critters, not just upping those that are already there.

I felt no real element of progression in Oblivion as enemies would scale to my level and equipment. I experienced no real feeling of being better. The arena was a prime example of this - I beat it as one of the first things I did.. That just doesn't make sense.

As for the freeroam arguement, I can understand it to some extent, but pushing the envelope of where you should be really makes for an interesting gameplay element. You can risk your life for some better equipment by going into uncharted territories. For those of you that played Asheron's Call, remember the Obsidian Plain. That place was scary the first time(s) you got there, because many of the monsters could kill you by sneezing near you. This wouldn't be the same if you knew that no matter where you went, monsters would scale to your level.

Thankfully, they have not implemented the scaling from Oblivion - for those interested read this http://fallout3.wordpress.com/2007/07/14/desslock-explains-level-scaling-on-fallout-3/

[Night Owl]

Also, getting killed by a level 72 rat just ruins it for me.

this doesn't happen. Oblivion typically throws different monsters at you. Rats are still one shot kills at 30th level.

Thankfully, they have not implemented the scaling from Oblivion - for those interested read this http://fallout3.wordpress.com/2007/07/14/desslock-explains-level-scaling-on-fallout-3/

His take on Oblivion's leveling is a bit off... the enemies generally don't level "with" you - they change. For example, you don't see Ogres in the wild at level 1 - you see rats. Then wolves at level 5. Then bears, etc...You see Ogres around level 15 (and you still see some of all the previous, like rats, but they are still plain old rats, not super rats)

Now some enemies (human, mostly) DO level with you, but that's the exception, not the rule.

I'm not sure if I like the fact that an area remains locked once you play it.... how would that matter if it levels with you to start with? All that serves is making it so once you see an area, coming back means you can wipe it out totally (but since it leveled with you when you entered, it never really kicked your ass in the first place) 

In other words, I can revisit a fort in Oblivion, and be challenged by new creatures. It doesn't sound like that will be the case here.

[Chucara]

Hmm.. I didn't remember that from Oblivion (played it just when it came out for a few weeks, haven't touched it since), but actually having monsters change to a different type makes even less sense for me. So if you return to Klamath in FO2 after 20 levels, deathclaws would be living in the sewers with the rat king instead of rats?

It all depends on the implementation, of course, but I really can't see the reason for doing auto leveling.

[Tank]

I'm with Chuc on this one, the auto-leveling is what put me off from Oblivion in the end.

[Night Owl]

Hmm.. I didn't remember that from Oblivion (played it just when it came out for a few weeks, haven't touched it since), but actually having monsters change to a different type makes even less sense for me. So if you return to Klamath in FO2 after 20 levels, deathclaws would be living in the sewers with the rat king instead of rats?

It all depends on the implementation, of course, but I really can't see the reason for doing auto leveling.

But the point is, if it's leveled, then you can do Klamath any time you wished, and still have a challenge. That's the whole point of leveling - to give the world a true free-form feel. Go anywhere, do anything, do it at any time, and still be challenged.

I mean, it's just not fun doing the Rat King area as a power-armored killing machine (and yea, I know we've all probably done it our fifth time through - but that gets old real fast.)

I'm really hoping some kind of leveling is there, because that will likely mean a true free-form non-linear experience, which the fallout world begs for. Without leveling, it kinda has to be linear (like the Fallout's were... go here first, go here second, go here or here third, etc).  Don't get me wrong - I like the way the Fallouts were linear, but the Elder Scrolls games really do the freeform thing well, and have been doing it better and better with every inception since Arena. 

And before anyone mentions it, yes I realize you technically *could* go to San Fran first in Fallout 2 (that really doesn't make it freeform though, because unless you were just goofing around and not playing the story, why on earth would you? And what kind of story was there then?)

[Solwyn]

I'm with Chucara and Tank on the not liking the auto-leveling.

I can see what Night Owl means about the free-form factor being affected by your level. But you have to remember that video games are still kind of constrained to the same rules they always were. (and no I'm not just talking about jumping to san fran, in fallout, I'm talking about the individual choices that lead you there, so I'm not just ignoring your post, NO).

If you could jump straight to killing bowser, the rest of the dungeon and water and fire levels would be pointless. And yes I realize with two warp whistles you can more or less jump to the end, but my point is that every game has a logical progression of the main plot. The Elder Scrolls universe usually did it by giving you a lot of free-form options as well as giving you the main quest. The problem that occurred with the auto-leveling is that it created a "glitch" wherein you could just avoid leveling up and take on the world at level one, which is counter-intuitive to the character development expected. And unlike the RPG element set forth by Final Fantasy, it doesn't behoove you to take the extra time to explore and develop your character before the main plot points, because if you're like me and you became the Archmage of the mage's guild before taking on Kvatch, Martin is completely surrounded by the most powerful demons the realm of oblivion has to offer, which makes the point of him coming into his own and taking on progressively harder enemies as the plot progresses a pointless endeavor.

In the fallout universe, you had to progress the plot in the order that it was given to you, but random encounters gave you the opportunities to become stronger as you went (similar to the Final Fantasy model). And personally, I think that model worked fairly well, given that you don't just see a screen flash and spend all your time killing the same bad guys over and over until you level, you see extra mini-plots being played out.

Besides that (here comes everyone's favorite topic, I get griped at every time I bring it up), the archetype of the hero (there it is) is typically played out over time. He starts out an assistant pig-keeper or a simple farmer or a dead-end job programmer, and goes through a series of progressively harder quests until he's the king of the realms or the Legendary Ring-bearer or The One. If Neo jumped straight ahead to the third movie, the first movie wouldn't have gotten any money (although it would have spared us the disappointment of two progressively worsening sequels).

So in my opinion, to keep the world feeling like it's "free-form non-linear" they can go with what the Elder Scrolls did as far as the world being divided into a "main plot" and the "character development" spheres. I personally feel that the world is more "real" if you wander into an area that can kill you because you're not ready.

[BlueCross]

No!  NOOOOOOO!!!!

I agree with Solwyn...  :bigcry: