*redacted*

[2house2fly]

Easier than disassembling a robot; parts are probably less complicated and you don't have to wait years for its power source to die so you can safely get to it. The construction crew would be pissed but maybe you could manipulate them into fighting the robot for you.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Forgot about kids. Logical exception with the media being what they are on games.

Never heard media attacking games for age of killable characters. If they attack games, they either do it for violence in general or for any kind of murder.
Those who do should be hunted down and crucified and skinned and eviscerated as an example for the others, though.

Also, it's not a "logical exception". Logical exception in a game must follow logic of the game world.

 

[shihonage]

Easier than disassembling a robot; parts are probably less complicated and you don't have to wait years for its power source to die so you can safely get to it. The construction crew would be pissed but maybe you could manipulate them into fighting the robot for you.

If power source lasts for years it would make it so much more incredibly valuable and worth any resources thrown at capturing it. Especially so in a post-apoc wasteland where you could make it power defense turrets or electric fences around your settlement or plasma weapons or someshit.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Fire! On the spaceships! It's just... I can't... there's no air... I mean... FIRE! ON SPACESHIPS!

Actually, complaints on idiocy of "sci-fi" movies are legitimate, because science fiction is about science. For some weird reasons (probably the science word in the genre name) these movies not only entertain but "educate" people who come out from viewing seances with all sorts of retarded beliefs.

In reality most of science-fiction out there isn't sci-fi but straight fantasy.

When I saw a trailer for 2012, I thought that it's going to be a parody of catastrophic movies focused on blowing up as much shit as possible. I still thought it's going to be a comedy when I heard them talking about neutrino particles changing their properties but then for some weird reason it turned out to be dead serious with family issues and drama and stuff. What the fuck ?
For some weird reason lots of people got "educated" by that movie about how world may end in 2012.

 

[Akratus]

Mass Effect 2 is hard science fiction though, you guys.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KjM9SouVN8&t=01m42s

Those "siantific inakyoorasies" you might see in the mass effect 2 intro for example is actually quantum mechanics. Developers are just smarter than people.

 

[Corporate_Jew_Master]

Mass Effect 2 is hard science fiction though, you guys.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KjM9SouVN8&t=01m42s

Those "siantific inakyoorasies" you might see in the mass effect 2 intro for example is actually quantum mechanics. Developers are just smarter than people.

You know who you are shooting why you are shooting

Every.Single.Time.

 

[Akratus]

And then they bring in a rapper to promote it too.

 

[Ninjerk]

That rapper out of all people....

 

[Morality Games]

Yes and Fallout 1 had Giant Lizards, Mongol Raiders and Green Orcs... and half rotten corpse with tree growing out of his head. Slim s just option in Prim Sheriff quest; something put to make Science! and Repair! skills to use so early in the game and not serious option which was either Mayers or NCR MPs. I am not saying someone has nostalgia glasses but... Someone should explain why Legion is retarded while Master Army is not BTW both are out of place in KWA post ITZ setting.

Because they were presented in a better way (as was the whole world) and managed to shine in a more sinister light, unlike the Legion who are simply portrayed as seeking to simply start the Buttsex Apocalypse.

The Legion isn't the core issue, it simply represents a big problem, namely how badly everything is fleshed out.

Do the cynical people on this website even have a concept of what a "great developer" would be? It seems they all have problems.

Black Isle/Troika were great devs. Maybe they were a product of their time, much like Obsidian is today. popamole

But the point remains that they are extremely overrated, as they only managed to churn out a good game (motb) in a log full of mediocrities (kotor 2) and shit. (everything else)

I can never really think of Kotor 2 as mediocre because it is my Planescape spiritual successor.

Fallout: NV rewards depending how much you are willing to invest in it, like most setting-driven games.

 

[Ninjerk]

I kind of robotically ran through NV taking House' side the whole way. Much of it didn't impress me, but I certainly didn't find it to be bad. I think it obviously being PA Gamebryo probably kept me from distancing it from FO3.

 

[Onholyservicebound]

Robots

Are you talking about the securitrons? Because they are fast, heavily armored(20 dt can shrug off most small arms fire.) 7 foot machines that have advanced enough AI to be able to assess combat situations without house, dual grenade launchers, high perception and 9mm machine guns. More importantly they are friendly, meaning they engage threats to the towns they inhabit. It would be a waste of ammo and resources to take them out. Raiders would probably be dumb enough to try, however since Victor was able to stalk Benny and the Khans unnoticed, it's safe to say that they're cautious and deeply aware of their surroundings,(Actually they're usually controlled directly by Mr.House) if they did get ambushed, the attackers would likely be reduced to bits by a volley 25mm grenades.

The only other robot that I know of is Primm Slim, which is a mascot in a gambling town,(That the townsfolk seem to generally like) if any assholes attempted to scrap it the townsfolk would probably string them up by their boot heels. There are some others scattered throughout the mojave, but they are always in very large numbers and are heavily armed and armoured, look at the dozen slaughtered raiders in the repcon building, they probably had a similar idea to yours.

As for the essential thing, there are none in New Vegas(as has been said) the children being essential is unfortunate, but that isn't because of game design. It's because giving people the ability murder children in a game where you can wield chainsaws with the bloody mess perk wouldn't be the wisest decision ever.(Media backlash.) But in my opinion, essential children are better than invisible children. And forunately, children in New Vegas aren't prominent or annoying, it had never crossed my mind to kill them.(For the most part I don't even notice them, as their involvement in quests is at it's most a single speech check or pickpocket to get a gun.) Now Little Lamplight, that's something of another nature entirely.

 

[shihonage]

Eh. It's not about the player wanting to kill children and being denied in doing so. It is about the cohesive world, where when a child gets in the line of fire, or is hurt by splash damage, it is actually treated like any other living thing in the world. It's not about satisfying someone's urges for a kindergarden spree shooting, but about keeping the world's depth and integrity.

When you open fire in a civilian area, there are going to be children around. This should weigh on your decisions as to how and where to do it, and whether, perhaps, to do it at all.

Regardless of the supposed "function" of Victor and ilk, he's still derp. He's the kind of derp that started being put into Fallout 2 as part of the "everything goes that we think is cool" package. The more you pimp up his technology, the less likely are his chances of being built and justifying his existence in a post-apocalyptic world. Not to mention - one time a faction gangs up on him, and there goes your defense. He is going to be exceedingly hard on resources to rebuild.

As for the Primm Bot, as I said before, nobody in a sane world would even allow the possibility for a robot to be sheriff of a town with lives at stake. And, he was thoroughly useless. People don't keep robots in desolate worlds for socializing, they put them to work on crops and building roofs above their heads.

 

[Onholyservicebound]

You're preaching to the choir pal, I feel the same way. The point is that in a game like Fallout, open world where you can mutilate people with a massive arsenal of brutal weapons, put their heads on plates and teabag their intestines, it would not be good press to have killable children. If I had my way they would be killable, and all the people who take issue would disappear forever.

He wasn't made in a post apocalyptic world, securitrons were made by robco and the think tank before the war, plans involving them were likely set in motion about 250 years ago. Knowing the inevitable, I see no reason for Mr. house to skimp out on his personal guard, if anything they could be better, and that's exactly the plan. It's why House runs the risk of losing some of them to ensure the plantium chip's arrival, he doesn't send his securitrons into the mojave lightly, there are very few, and they have a definite purpose. And what faction? Victor can easily take on a group of raiders, and we've established that he has sensors good enough to remain undetected by Benny and the Khans, he is more than fast and smart enough to avoid threats. The brotherhood is in hiding from the NCR, attacking mr house would be idiotic for them. The NCR is allied with house, destroying his securitrons while caesar is across the dam would have negative repercussions. The legion has no use for scrap metal and energy cells, and securitrons don't venture into their territories anyway.

Meh, he only becomes sheriff after all of the powder gangers are dead, it's definitely the worst of the 3 options, but he is durable, and at least a better alternative to beagle. YEaaah except that they are a GAMBLING TOWN, meaning they survive off of the patronage of travellers/troopers, not their imaginary crops, goodsprings sure, but not Primm. Or did you miss the two giant casinos?

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Eh. It's not about the player wanting to kill children and being denied in doing so. It is about the cohesive world, where when a child gets in the line of fire, or is hurt by splash damage, it is actually treated like any other living thing in the world. It's not about satisfying someone's urges for a kindergarden spree shooting, but about keeping the world's depth and integrity.

Not to mention that "wanting to kill children" is a retarded strawman. When I kill a town or a village, I kill everything regardless of age and species. It's not like I walk into a town and see a kid and think "OMG I must kill children!"

You're preaching to the choir pal, I feel the same way. The point is that in a game like Fallout, open world where you can mutilate people with a massive arsenal of brutal weapons, put their heads on plates and teabag their intestines, it would not be good press to have killable children. If I had my way they would be killable, and all the people who take issue would disappear forever.

Are there actually such people, though or were they imagined?

 

[Lancehead]

Eh. It's not about the player wanting to kill children and being denied in doing so. It is about the cohesive world, where when a child gets in the line of fire, or is hurt by splash damage, it is actually treated like any other living thing in the world. It's not about satisfying someone's urges for a kindergarden spree shooting, but about keeping the world's depth and integrity.

When you open fire in a civilian area, there are going to be children around. This should weigh on your decisions as to how and where to do it, and whether, perhaps, to do it at all.

I agree with that but I can't really see lack of that as a flaw in NV. The main reason being able to kill anyone can be desirable is that it makes the quest and overall narrative design to be open-ended. I doubt being able to kill children NV would've changed any of the quest design, unlike in Fallout 3 with Little Lamplight.

 

[Akratus]

Robots

As for the essential thing, there are none in New Vegas(as has been said) the children being essential is unfortunate, but that isn't because of game design. It's because giving people the ability murder children in a game where you can wield chainsaws with the bloody mess perk wouldn't be the wisest decision ever.(Media backlash.) But in my opinion, essential children are better than invisible children. And forunately, children in New Vegas aren't prominent or annoying, it had never crossed my mind to kill them.(For the most part I don't even notice them, as their involvement in quests is at it's most a single speech check or pickpocket to get a gun.) Now Little Lamplight, that's something of another nature entirely.

And Josh Sawyer actually appologized for the mick and ralph courier.
Now I wish Beth would do the same for lamplight. Or the whole game really.

 

[2house2fly]

I'm sorry, it's just not consistent with the rest of the fiction that a machine designed to protect its owners from crime would be utilised to protect a town from crime. Furthermore, there's no way a town that relies on a tourist economy could benefit from having an unusual feature like a robot sheriff which would cause people to talk about their town after they leave to people who have never been. Modern day tourist towns have no such novelties.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

And Josh Sawyer actually appologized for the mick and ralph courier.

This kid? What's the problem with him?

 

[Athelas]

Overseer is in a raised platform where he can duck your "eye shots".

It's still an arbitrary limitation - why can't you blow up his platform? And your explanation for ducking eye shots is just silly. By contrast, Yes Man is an A.I. that can be backed up. Really, these sort of nitpicks come across at grasping at straws.

 

[Commissar Draco]

Not to mention the Overseer is Immortal in Finale too when he's outside the Vault and without his Command Throne. You can shoot him after he kicks you out to the Wasteland but he always crawls back... even when Flame Thrower burned.

 

[shihonage]

Not to mention the Overseer is Immortal in Finale too when he's outside the Vault and without his Command Throne. You can shoot him after he kicks you out to the Wasteland but he always crawls back... even when Flame Thrower burned.

Pretty sure that is a locked dialogue sequence, and you can kill him for good right after it ends.

It's still an arbitrary limitation - why can't you blow up his platform?

It fits with the abstracted presentation of Fallout. This isn't Crusader, where the environment is destructible. In Fallout, you can't blow up 99% of the environment, so this instance doesn't, in fact, break immersion with the game.

And your explanation for ducking eye shots is just silly.

If you think a raised platform where one can seek cover from incoming fire is silly, any exchange with you is pointless.

 

[Athelas]

It fits with the abstracted presentation of Fallout. This isn't Crusader, where the environment is destructible. In Fallout, you can't blow up 99% of the environment, so this instance doesn't, in fact, break immersion with the game.

Enough with the strawman. Every video game is an abstraction. You can't really destroy much (if any) scenery in modern games either, the graphics have simply improved (or not, depending on your tastes). The idea that the creators of the first Fallout deliberaly choose an isometric view for abstraction is bogus, 3d graphics were simply in their infancy in the 90's.
Besides, how many other NPC's in Fallout are conveniently protected by a steel barrier that still allows you to talk with them?

If you think a raised platform where one can seek cover from incoming fire is silly, any exchange with you is pointless.

Well, thanks for posting that awesome scene. How are they comparable again? The Master's platform isn't there for cover from hostile fire, in fact, it doesn't seem to cover him at all. Personally, I don't really care about such things, although you certainly seem to.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

What if you threw a grenade onto the platform?

 

[shihonage]

Enough with the strawman. Every video game is an abstraction. You can't really destroy much (if any) scenery in modern games either, the graphics have simply improved (or not, depending on your tastes).

There's no traceable logic here that somehow counters my argument. Nor do you understand the meaning of "strawman".

Your argument would only make sense if there was an Overseer in a modern Fallout game that is similarly protected from gunfire underneath, and I was bitching that it makes sense in old Fallout only. Now, your attempt to put words in my mouth that way would indeed be a strawman.

That said, isometric view definitely afforded more of an abstraction. Whether you can trace a direct line from your character's hands to Overseer's head in a hexagonal environment, is about as meaningful as doing that on a board with plastic figures while playing a computer-less RPG.

The idea that the creators of the first Fallout deliberaly choose an isometric view for abstraction is bogus, 3d graphics were simply in their infancy in the 90's

Here's a generous tip in case you want to stop sounding like Todd Howard in the future:

1) A post-apocalyptic FPS with fully 3D environments and enemies, modern mouselook, realtime lightsourcing, driveable vehicles, talking heads, enterable buildings, was created by Bethesda in 1995, two years before Fallout 1 came out.

2) Modern games such as Path of Exile, Diablo 3, Torchlight 2 and Wasteland 2 all use a similar perspective out of design choice.

3) The real Fallout 3 (Van Buren), used this perspective as well.

But Bethtards have no failstate detection, so I'm no longer directing time and energy your way. Why don't you just embrace your nature, go to NMA forums, and start the thousandth "I liked Fallout 3, explain to me why you hate it" thread.

 

[Athelas]

There's no traceable logic here that somehow counters my argument. Nor do you understand the meaning of "strawman".

You keep making these blank statements without any arguments to back them up, and expecting people to just accept them. If I flat-out said 'You have a cactus deeply embedded in your anus', would this statement stand on its own? As for your strawman, it's the insistence that it's impossible to suspend disbelief in a 3d game environment. Mind you, I agree that an isometric view works better abstraction-wise, but it's just that - an opinion. It's completely subjective.

Your argument would only make sense if there was an Overseer in a modern Fallout game that is similarly protected from gunfire underneath, and I was bitching that it makes sense in old Fallout only.

Huh? The debate was about the issue of progression and important NPC's in a sandbox RPG. You seem to be deliberately narrowing the debate to one single NPC to avoid addressing my criticisms.

Now, your attempt to put words in my mouth that way would indeed be a strawman.

Speaking of putting words in someone's mouth...

But Bethtards have no failstate detection, so I'm no longer directing time and energy your way. Why don't you just embrace your nature, go to NMA forums, and start the thousandth "I liked Fallout 3, explain to me why you hate it" thread.

I despise Bethesda games. Again with the strawman. What does Bethesda even have to do with this? New Vegas is an Obsidian game.

Here's a generous tip in case you want to stop sounding like an idiot in the future:

1) A post-apocalyptic FPS with fully 3D environments and enemies, modern mouselook, realtime lightsourcing, driveable vehicles, talking heads, enterable buildings, was created by Bethesda in 1995, two years before Fallout 1 came out.

2) Modern games such as Path of Exile, Diablo 3, Torchlight 2 and Wasteland 2 all use a similar perspective out of design choice.

3) The real Fallout 3 (Van Buren), used this perspective as well.

Way to twist my words. I didn't say 3D didn't exist in the 90's, I said it was still in such an early stage of development that it wasn't viable or attractive for a lot of game designers. Was that Bethesda game from 1995 a sandbox-esque RPG with turn-based combat, lots of dialogue options and C&C? Besides, by bringing up those examples of modern isometric games, you seem to have made my argument for me (and undermined your own).