:!:Todd Howard said:I really liked the first game and thought Fallout would be a great fit for us, it has all the big things I love about RPGs – player freedom, big world, go do what you want type of stuff.
Smart use of capitalization, there. As in Jeff Smart, of course.dagorkan said:Yet there are fifteen+ pages ANALyzing a handful of concept art pictures and one music track, that are not even 'official'.
Actually, my trust in Bethesda is low enough to rather hope it's total crap, so not playing it will be a trivial decision and I won't feel like I miss anything.The_Nameless_Prick said:I just hope it's fun to play and has some depth, I'm sure it wont based on the dodgy article, but we'll see.
Oh, deity. He's making me sick.The Toddler said:I think he’s got something to say, and I think it’s important.
Of course tha hint that if you disagree with them, you are just plain wrong couldn't be missing.You may not agree, you may be too cynical to look at it objectively anymore
That's.. blasphemy!Relayer71 said:Todd as Ash in Evil Dead 3 Army Of Darkness: "It's pillow talk baby!"
TalesfromtheCrypt said:Since I've read poopers third installment of the fallout sitcomt I picture Todd as a sinister, bitter, brutal tyrannt who sexually absuses his employees.
I never saw it that way, but when I'm looking at a picture of him now its totaly fits. Poopers has done a disturbing but also heartbraking analysis of the monster's soul. Give him teh noble price.
micmu said::!:Todd Howard said:I really liked the first game and thought Daggerfall would be a great fit for us, it has all the big things I love about RPGs – player freedom, big world, go do what you want type of stuff.
The Todd said:Obviously I can’t talk about the game itself yet, but I can give you a look into how I/we approached it...
I obviously replayed the games, and Fallout 1 remains the truest inspiration for what we’re doing, but again, it can be hard to get at the “soul” of it, because of its aging...
game’s manual... I obviously looked at all the PA movies – Boy and his Dog, Mad Max, Strangelove, etc...
Again this weird notion that making a true Fallout 3 would be a "rehash" despite there not being a game like them for 7-8 years, while changing core game mechanics to things we have seen in countless other games in recent times would make it "innovative" or a "quality" product.aries202 said:Personally I would rather see a Fallout game that has its 'soul' intact and which sells millions than a game that looks like a rehash of the former games and just sells 100,000 units (copies).
aries202 said:However, I'm still not sure that Todd&Bethesda can pull this off aka doing it correctly, since they don't seem to have any experience developing a very story based game as the Fallout games, afterall, are.
and I personally doubt that he has time to read the Codex at all.
micmu said:Once they invent Action/manuals, Fallout's manual will be "aged", too.
We’ve left no stone unturned in trying to find Fallout’s “soulâ€,
I do not see why the only way to play a good game is to make one yourself -- I am a firm believer in the old adage that if one is to do something right, he has to do it himself, and all that, but this is going overboard a bit.aries202 said:I know you can don't do this, but if you are so mad at Todd & Bethesda building and making a Fallout game, why then do you not make your own PA-game - the way you think it should be made.
And I daresay very few people here will in fact buy the game. In the meantime, quite a few people think quite fondly of the Fallout games, and are therefore understandably outraged at the treatment which Fallout 3 has received. It's a no-brainer, really; people love Fallout, people want more Fallout, instead, people are getting explosive diarrhoea. The fact that Bethesda and their fanbase are into scatology, does not change that.That's exactly what Todd is saying i.e. Bethesda is oging to make a Fallout game, bases on their decisions, not yours or rmine decisions as to what the game looks like, setting etc. Like Bioware & Obsidian it means that Bethesda indeed values faninputs and inspirations for the game, but the final decisions of how the game is going to be is his,
Todd Howards, the decider. Deal with it --- or don't buy the game. It really is that simple...
I am guessing you didn't read the last paragraph of Todd's little whine-fest. That's okay, it was hard for me, too. Take your time. Good man.And nowhere do Todd say anything about that Fallout is going to change people lives. He says that Bethesda get letters from fans and from people whom Morrowind/Oblivion have helped through difficult times in their lives by allowing these people to play a character in the game(s) that were stronger than these people were - at that particular time - in real life. (some people have a punching bag to deal with frustrations, others play Morrowind/Oblivion or other games).
The gameplay of Fallout is very much part of its "soul". Everything Todd has said so far neglects that very simple fact, and it is quite clear that none of it shall be preserved.Personally I would rather see a Fallout game that has its 'soul' intact and which sells millions than a game that looks like a rehash of the former games and just sells 100,000 units (copies). I know some of you (or probably nearly all of you) think that a game that is popular can't be quality, but it can, imo. Just like a good book can be very popular, and sell a lot of units (copies). It is, really, finding a balance between the two, and the balance is sometimes hard to find, I think.
Far out, man.As for Todd's other comments in the 'meet the devs.' thread, it look to me like Todd did think a lot about Fallout's iconic status, and it kind of reassures me a bit that he has read the "One Woman’s Path through the Desert" manual that came with Fallout 1 (I've read it, too, and it was really great read and helped me understand a lot of the spirit or soul in Fallout).
What the fuck does that even mean? They could have a general idea of making a post-apocalyptic desert soccer game and stick the "Fallout" tag on it. Hell, that's not too far off from the truth.It is also clear to me, from Todd's statement or comment that Bethesda did indeed make (good?)
research and judt didn't plunge into making Fallout 3 without having soming general idea of where they were going to take the Fallout franchise.
Then what was Van Buren, old? The only thing that has aged about Fallout is the way it looks, and even that is debatable. Fallout needs to be "modernised" like Citizen Kane and 2001 need boobies and a hip-hop soundtrack.Personally, I like that Todd & Bethesda are 'removing the aging' of Fallout, simply because (many) people do indeed speak of FO in nostalgic tones (just like so many older people speak nostagicly about their childhood).
Actually, Bethesda do not have any experience in any of the areas of game design which made Fallout great. Sadder still is that nothing they have said or done so far shows that they are willing to learn.However, I'm still not sure that Todd&Bethesda can pull this off aka doing it correctly, since they don't seem to have any experience developing a very story based game as the Fallout games, afterall, are.
aries202 said:I know you can don't do this, but if you are so mad at Todd & Bethesda building and making a Fallout game, why then do you not make your own PA-game - the way you think it should be made.
That's exactly what Todd is saying i.e. Bethesda is oging to make a Fallout game, bases on their decisions, not yours or rmine decisions as to what the game looks like, setting etc. Like Bioware & Obsidian it means that Bethesda indeed values faninputs and inspirations for the game, but the final decisions of how the game is going to be is his,
Todd Howards, the decider. Deal with it --- or don't buy the game. It really is that simple...
And nowhere do Todd say anything about that Fallout is going to change people lives. He says that Bethesda get letters from fans and from people whom Morrowind/Oblivion have helped through difficult times in their lives by allowing these people to play a character in the game(s) that were stronger than these people were - at that particular time - in real life. (some people have a punching bag to deal with frustrations, others play Morrowind/Oblivion or other games).
I try not not to secondguess other people's motives, including Todd Howard's motives for writing this stuff, and I personally doubt that he has time to read the Codex at all.
Personally I would rather see a Fallout game that has its 'soul' intact and which sells millions than a game that looks like a rehash of the former games and just sells 100,000 units (copies). I know some of you (or probably nearly all of you) think that a game that is popular can't be quality, but it can, imo. Just like a good book can be very popular, and sell a lot of units (copies). It is, really, finding a balance between the two, and the balance is sometimes hard to find, I think.
As for Todd's other comments in the 'meet the devs.' thread, it look to me like Todd did think a lot about Fallout's iconic status, and it kind of reassures me a bit that he has read the "One Woman’s Path through the Desert" manual that came with Fallout 1 (I've read it, too, and it was really great read and helped me understand a lot of the spirit or soul in Fallout).
It is also clear to me, from Todd's statement or comment that Bethesda did indeed make (good?)
research and judt didn't plunge into making Fallout 3 without having soming general idea of where they were going to take the Fallout franchise.
And, irrc, Frank Miller's Dark Night's cartoony drawings for the Dark Knight series (for batman) borrows inspiration rather heavily from a certain movie called 'necropolis' which, irrc, is a very bleek, grim and dark tale of the future.
Personally, I like that Todd & Bethesda are 'removing the aging' of Fallout, simply because (many) people do indeed speak of FO in nostalgic tones (just like so many older people speak nostagicly about their childhood).
However, I'm still not sure that Todd&Bethesda can pull this off aka doing it correctly, since they don't seem to have any experience developing a very story based game as the Fallout games, afterall, are.
Todd's more suited to publish inspirational kitten posters for dentist's offices than PA cRPGs.Todd Howard said:I have seen children dying of brain tumors who wanted as their last request to be able to talk to me, and have gone to their graves with a peace brought on by knowing that their belief in this kind of character is intact.
Cimmerian Nights said:Todd's more suited to publish inspirational kitten posters for dentist's offices than PA cRPGs.Todd Howard said:I have seen children dying of brain tumors who wanted as their last request to be able to talk to me, and have gone to their graves with a peace brought on by knowing that their belief in this kind of character is intact.