Rosh speaks on Followind

[Volourn]

1. Did I said they'd be huggin the PC? No, I didn't.

2. No, it doesn't. Ditching to me means removing themf rom aprty and never working with them again. Leaving them at a "base' of sorts while you do some reconnaissance is not ditching them.

 

[Lasakon]

Yeah people die all the time, especially when gun fire is involved. Hell I watched a movie last night where everyone but the hero dies.

Yet when we play a game we are like "Oh no, they killed dogmeat! Reload! Reload!"
Death happens, it's part of the story.

I'm way too guilty of this. I probably can't play a single JA 2 map without reloading because Shadow gets his head blown off all too often. I just get very attached to my party members.

 

[Crichton]

Ever notice how the bad guys in Fallout could kill you with one shot?

Ever notice how the bad guys in real-time RPGs can't?

Think about that for a while.

Actually, I've had people killed in one shot in...
Balbur's gate (1 spell)
Icewind dale 1+2 (again, insta-death spells)
Freedom force (liberty lad really doesn't have enough HP)

Though if TB reallly did equate to more 1-shot kills (by either side), then I'd be emphatically against it, 1-shot/spell/attack kills are the bane of any tactical system because there's no reaction, you can't react, you're dead, so if you're dealing w/ someone who has a 20% chance of killing you in the first turn, you'll be reloading 20% of the time, yippee.

One thing that a lot of people don't seem to be getting these days is that Fallout is not a party game.

I happen to prefer party games, but if one is only going to have one unit (and hence tactical thinking is out), why is the TB important? Why not just real time with a pause button like NWN? The SPECIAL system can certainly be made to fit NWN's 6 sec round system, and an auto-attack feature like NWN would be useful for a fallout-type game b/c one tends to be using the same attack every turn

Vault dweller shoots nearest enemy in the eyes
Vault dweller shoots nearest enemy in the eyes
Vault dweller shoots nearest enemy in the eyes....

 

[suibhne]

I happen to prefer party games, but if one is only going to have one unit (and hence tactical thinking is out), why is the TB important? Why not just real time with a pause button like NWN? The SPECIAL system can certainly be made to fit NWN's 6 sec round system, and an auto-attack feature like NWN would be useful for a fallout-type game b/c one tends to be using the same attack every turn

Vault dweller shoots nearest enemy in the eyes
Vault dweller shoots nearest enemy in the eyes
Vault dweller shoots nearest enemy in the eyes....

I think I've seen you post this point a few times, and it's not getting any more insightful with age.

The number of your errors is two:

1. The combat scenario you're describing is true only for a sniper character with high PE, and...

2. ...even then it's damn stupid.

When using a sniper and facing multiple baddies in FO, I generally take out the most dangerous ones first - perhaps the guy 12 hexes away with a power rifle, for example - rather than the "nearest enemy." Even if you're only talking about a single character template in FO, the tactical approach you're outlining is moronically inflexible. And it demonstrates quite well why you think real-time combat (with or without pause) would be adequate for a FO setting.

Perhaps you should play the game (again?) before opining its lack of sophistication.

 

[Crichton]

When using a sniper and facing multiple baddies in FO, I generally take out the most dangerous ones first - perhaps the guy 12 hexes away with a power rifle, for example - rather than the "nearest enemy." Even if you're only talking about a single character template in FO, the tactical approach you're outlining is moronically inflexible. And it demonstrates quite well why you think real-time combat (with or without pause) would be adequate for a FO setting.

Perhaps you should play the game (again?) before opining its lack of sophistication.

You can feel free to replace "nearest enemy" with "enemy with most powerful offense" if you like but since I mostly found myself mobbed with either slavers or mutants that were identical, it was a moot point.

As far as other charecter types, I made a good faith effort both at a melee charecter and a burst fire charecter and neither one was worth half of the high PE charecter with the turbo plasma gun, but again, if it'll make you happy, replace "shoots enemy in the eyes with best rifle" with "strikes enemy with super-sliedge" or "opens up with minigun". The point is that since the SPECIAL system gives each charecter one worthwhile attack, once combat has started, there aren't many sensible options, this is why games that are actually interested in tactics give the player more than one unit to command so even when each unit has only one worthwhile attack (like FO 1+2 and a hell of a lot of other games), the combinations of them can produce some thought.

 

[Jed]

And you think Real Time would make the combat more interactive? Please, do elaborate. Or maybe I can guess: sit there twiddling your thumbs while watching your sniper character shoot everyone in the eyes with the best rifle.

 

[Crichton]

And you think Real Time would make the combat more interactive? Please, do elaborate. Or maybe I can guess: sit there twiddling your thumbs while watching your sniper character shoot everyone in the eyes with the best rifle.

No, I think allowing one to control more units would make the combat more interesting, but if it's not going to be interesting, at least it can either A) be over quickly or B) not require me to press the same combination of buttons 20 times per fight. This is why I suggested the NWN combat system, your charecter bashes away without your input being needed, so you can, A) carry on a conversation with other people in the room, B) read a good book, C) sketch, D) do some paperwork. Then, when combat's over, you can get back to some part of the game that's handled properly.

 

[Walks with the Snails]

I happen to prefer party games, but if one is only going to have one unit (and hence tactical thinking is out), why is the TB important? Why not just real time with a pause button like NWN? The SPECIAL system can certainly be made to fit NWN's 6 sec round system, and an auto-attack feature like NWN would be useful for a fallout-type game b/c one tends to be using the same attack every turn

Say it with me, everyone. We've had this discussion before. If it sounds like we're just making a bunch of assumptions, think of it like you just stumbled in on an old married couple who've already talked about and settled a great deal of issues before you ever entered the picture and you just don't know their shorthand before just blathering off that you've got ideas they never, ever thought of. Damn, I ought to make that my sig or something judging by how much it's come up the past few days.

As far as NWN rounds, God no. I still remember literally leaving NWN running for 15 minutes while my regenerating, damage resistant character racked up enough 20's to kill a dragon. That is incredibly boring and tends to be at least as a common problem with RT games as having to blast away a bunch of worthless enemies in TB. A poorly designed combat is a poorly designed combat, it has nothing to do with TB/RT. But either way, I don't want to play screensavers, thanks.

As far as other charecter types, I made a good faith effort both at a melee charecter and a burst fire charecter and neither one was worth half of the high PE charecter with the turbo plasma gun, but again, if it'll make you happy, replace "shoots enemy in the eyes with best rifle" with "strikes enemy with super-sliedge" or "opens up with minigun". The point is that since the SPECIAL system gives each charecter one worthwhile attack, once combat has started, there aren't many sensible options, this is why games that are actually interested in tactics give the player more than one unit to command so even when each unit has only one worthwhile attack (like FO 1+2 and a hell of a lot of other games), the combinations of them can produce some thought.

Huh? Small arms and energy weapons guys both can easily switch between single-shot and burst fire. Melee folks also have things like knockback that throw another kink into things. I'd also sometimes take those eye shots on the snipers to blind them so they couldn't hit me, take down other guys in the meantime, then polish them off. You can always be a melee and guns guy, too. It's not like the only way to play the game is to powergame and overspecialize.

 

[Crichton]

As far as NWN rounds, God no. I still remember literally leaving NWN running for 15 minutes while my regenerating, damage resistant character racked up enough 20's to kill a dragon. That is incredibly boring and tends to be at least as a common problem with RT games as having to blast away a bunch of worthless enemies in TB. A poorly designed combat is a poorly designed combat, it has nothing to do with TB/RT. But either way, I don't want to play screensavers, thanks.

I had the exact same experiance with NWN myself, I llitterally left the final combat to go pack luggage (my cleric had already cast every spell worth casting so it was just smash with the old morning star until the lizard hit the floor). But the only difference for me between this and the final fight of FO (step out from behind pillar, shoot, step back into cover x infinity) was that I had to keep pressing buttons over and over again in FO (I really could have used a macro there, it was the exact same sequence every bleeding time), whereas in NWN, the computer did the button pushing for me, if I'm not going to be making decisions, I'd at least like to avoid being a data-entry clerk.

 

[Briosafreak]

This is why I suggested the NWN combat system, your charecter bashes away without your input being needed,

This statement IS PRICELESS!! PRICELESS I TELL YOU!!!

 

[Major_Blackhart]

This type of thing is what we're NOT about at the codex.

 

[Lasakon]

I think he has a point. Combat is nothing but a nuisance. The whole exploring and bartering was also a chore. They should really just make a RPG that is just a sequence of cut scenes so we can't get rid of the whole "video game" thing.

 

[Crichton]

This type of thing is what we're NOT about at the codex.

Then I suppose I'm back where I started when I asked the stupid question in the first place.

let's review, in FO, FO2 and arcanum one only has control of one charecter, so one effectively only has one charecter. If this is a vital part of these games for others (it isn't for me, I wish I could command the others), then why go TB?

With only one charecter, positioning is nearly irrelevant, even the simplest tactics are impossible (how can you provide supression fire for an assualt if you can only control one of the two units?). One can, in better designed games, have a range of attacks for a given charecter, but given that one only has to select one for the single charecter, what good does TB do as opposed to paused RT?

The point is the FO 1+2, arcanum and NWN have almost exactly the same amount of decision making in combat, the only two choices are target priorities and choosing one of a very small range of attacks. And 3/4 of the time, both decisions will be no brainers. Given that there is a strong interest for some in having both TB and AI-controlled lackwit NPC's, I'm asking why anyone would bother w/ TB combat when there are so few decisions to be made.

 

[Crichton]

I think he has a point. Combat is nothing but a nuisance.

The point was the combat in fallout was nothing but a waste of time, what's the point of combat without tactical thinking? (or challanging one's reflexes in a FPS?) Since fallout's combat didn't involve any thinking, why the push to keep it turn-based? NWN's combat had the exact same ammount of thinking (target priority + attack option), and it didn't take as long or involve as much repeated button pressing.

 

[Jed]

No, I think allowing one to control more units would make the combat more interesting, but if it's not going to be interesting, at least it can either A) be over quickly or B) not require me to press the same combination of buttons 20 times per fight. This is why I suggested the NWN combat system, your charecter bashes away without your input being needed, so you can, A) carry on a conversation with other people in the room, B) read a good book, C) sketch, D) do some paperwork. Then, when combat's over, you can get back to some part of the game that's handled properly.

You're the fucking reason we have to live in a world blighted by goddamn Dungeon Siege.

 

[Crichton]

You're the fucking reason we have to live in a world blighted by goddamn Dungeon Siege.

\

well, not having played dungeon siege, I can't comment directly, but in what way would you say the combat of FO1+2 or arcanum is superior to dungeon siege? the way I understand it, in dungeon siege one did have control over multiple units so presumably there were interesting ways to combine them (correct me if I'm wrong, like I said, no personal experiance)

 

[Lasakon]

To say Fallout had no combat strategy would be utter bullshit. I can't count the number of times I did risky things that payed off(Or failed) in Fallout. Just because you played the game that way shouldn't suggest that everybody did and that it is completely devoid of tactics.

 

[mr. lamat]

if fallout had a combat system that was as advanced as x-com's, i do honestly believe they'd be building temples to the game today. instead, it got somewhat boring at times, tedious at others and occassionaly, it was the games biggest letdown. there are reasons to love fallout, but the combat is not one of them.

was it a notch above the baldur's gate clickfest, or dugeon siege's screensaver? yes, but that really isn't saying much. compare it to x-com, or ja, both games four to five years it's senior then relate those combat engines, which would have been quite simple to make at the time to fallout's.

personally, i'm hoping for something along the lines of freedom force's netimmerse engine for the next fallout. it's semi-tactical and pokemonninjamaster2122 over at the elderscrolls forum will still get to play dolly dress-up with his character.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

personally, i'm hoping for something along the lines of freedom force's netimmerse engine for the next fallout. it's semi-tactical and pokemonninjamaster2122 over at the elderscrolls forum will still get to play dolly dress-up with his character.

Would you per chance be jfood, or somesuch, over there?

 

[mr. lamat]

yaw... i almost got banned yesterday too.

who knew 'eat a bag of dicks' was profane?

 

[Major_Blackhart]

Mass Bannings anyone?

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

who knew 'eat a bag of dicks' was profane?

Beats me. It sounds so harmless, doesn't it?

 

[DemonKing]

Why do I get the feeling that even if you wiped Rosh's mind of all memory of playing the original Fallout, and just left him with the warm tingling feeling that it was a great game, and then gave him the original Fallout to play merely changing the title to Fallout 3, he would still bitch and whine about it?

As another poster said, the Fallout name is just baggage nowdays. Bethseba would have been far better creating a new post-apocalyptic game without that baggage. After all, wasn't Fallout branded as "the spiritual successor to Wasteland". Surely it would be safer to do the same with any Fallout "sequel". The ire of the Hardcoe Fallout Fans just isn't worth it, IMHO.

I don't personally believe that Betsheba will/can make a great Fallout CRPG. The change from isometric perspective, the joint-development for consoles, the previous games they have developed, and the lack of any previous FO experience doesn't bode well, but then I don't think on the evidence of Troika's first two releases they could do much better at present.

Best case scenerio for mine is that Bethsheba produce a decent CRPG that most people enjoy for what it is but that Rosh hates completely: because someone as sad and fanatical as him deserves to die bitter and alone. :wink:

 

[mr. lamat]

Best case scenerio for mine is that Bethsheba produce a decent CRPG that most people enjoy for what it is but that Rosh hates completely: because someone as sad and fanatical as him deserves to die bitter and alone.

he'll still have all those sailors to comfort him.

 

[Human Shield]

Fallout had many options in combat. You could see % to hit while aiming, you had to judge movement to get a better shot. Lead enemies into group and use burst or explosive. AP or HP. Judging how far the enemy could move helps in fighting Deathclaws. The way many perks gave bonuses to combat (make the extra movement perk work in real-time). The turn-based combat was great mostly because of SPECIAL, the combat was your character fighting. It made designing your character matter. Real-time would remove all interesting choices, improvements to your character couldn't be enjoyed and observed as much. Fighting 3 Deathclaws in real-time would be stupid.

In Fallout combat you could really see your character grow. With a munchkin character or Fallout 2's terrible pace the combat can get uninteresting. The special system can be adjusted to better pace things (10 agility with gifted should be looked into, maybe a few levels would be needed to get the full 10 AP).