J.E. Sawyer said recently:



Jesse Heinig, who worked on Fallout 1, replied:



Perhaps Chris Taylor could shed some light on what actually was the design goal for Fallout 1's weapon skill progression? The Vault - Fallout Wiki * Fallout Online * Fallout IRC Channel * Fallout: New Vegas

Fallout 1 weapons were designed for effect. I always intended that there be some weapons that were clearly superior to others (just as there are in real life). The idea was to balance everything with ammo availability. Good weapons were supposed to get less ammo. In the original design there was a lot less ammo and the thought was that the player would have to switch weapons fairly often since their weapon of choice would only have a finite number of shots.

Since there were multiple solutions to most challenges, and combat wasn't required for the vast majority of the game, I was perfectly happy with suboptimal design choices during character creation, especially since there are systems in place to swap tagged skills and otherwise develop your character differently after creation.

It makes replay more interesting and I thought it might add something to the outside "social" aspect of the game. Even then, I thought the community around Fallout was very special (pun not intended) and we loved the idea of people chatting in forums about different problems and solutions during the game.

I don't disagree with Josh, with the possible exception of "F1 and F2 had phased obsolescence designed into their weapon skill system, but the player wasn't let in on it that design goal at all." I don't think that was a design goal. It's simply a natural conclusion to the design for effect that we were shooting for (pun intended). I'm guessing he sees that as a problem, I see it as a feature. *shrug*

FO:NV is a very, very good game. They did a lot stuff right with it, including the weapons. Feels more balanced and interestingly designed than in the previous game, but I haven't sat down and anolyzed it at all. I'm just enjoying myself (especially after the last patch) playing it.

FOOs weapons are being designed with a different set of goals in mind, since having suboptimal player builds as part of a multiplayer game is very different than in a single-player adventure (especially of relatively short playing time and player investment required).

so is the official acronym for fallout online , FOO (like Mr. T. would say it) or FOOL?

FoOl (Fallout Online)

I just like the V13 my self.

But honestly, who cares exactly what the official acronym or name is. As long as its is a good to totaly awesome, can stop playing MMO.

Dave Chase

FOO, FOOL, V13, PV13... heck, I'm not sure what to call it anymore.

Chris I read that you were a main man behind FOT and also a board game?

After FOOL I hope we can see a true FOTO . or FOTOL?

I'm nerding pretty hard after reading this page. Thanks for the reply Chris. And Ausir - do you have a link to that interview - I'd like to read it as I imagine some other people might also.

I don't really see either 1 or 2 as having phased obsolescence being built into the game play. I pretty frequently would go the entire game with small guns and perhaps tag energy weapons later, though this didn't seem entirely necessary. The Sniper Rifle was bad enough to get me through just about anything and I'd rarely even bother with Bug Guns, it just didn't suit the way I liked to play and, from my stand point, the ability to play it the way I liked it was the real design goal. In fact, I frequently resented the near necessity of tagging unarmed or melee to get through the Temple of Trials. I certainly never got the impression that I was 'supposed' to progress through the weapons as such.

Beyond that, I don't think the player was really that 'in the dark' about the availability of weapons early on. Sure, we weren't given any hints but I never for a second thought 'Oh, energy weapons. I bet I'll get one of those right off the bat, I guess I can skip small guns lol' (this came full circle the time I discovered the Alien Wreck on my way to Shady Sands, but that's beside the point). It's a nuclear wasteland, who sincerely expects they're going to walk out the door and start seeing ray guns laying around?

I'm sure that's happened, but I have my doubts that it was frequently enough of a problem that they should have designed the game around it. In fact, this kind of makes a point of Bethesda's blindspot, in that they seem to make the assumption that combat is absolute and constant. In Fallout 1 and 2 there was almost always more than one way of going about anything and frequently more than that. Fallout 3 is much more combat driven perhaps another option thrown in, usually in terms of a dialogue option that you either have the stats for or you don't. So, it makes sense that they would want to include energy weapons earlier but, and this is a bit of over-anolysis on my part, I'd have to dispute such a proliferation of very high tech weapons. It just doesn't seem plausible.

I can attest to the same feeling that I never really needed to "Upgrade" from small guns. I was enough of a BAMF to shoot my way outta any situation (given the availability of armor piercing rounds). To this ends I also think that combat is overstated in Bethesda's interpretation of Fallout also when did every scum svcker in the wastes become well to do enough to afford assault weapons? In FO1 particularly I found that talking my way out of a situation usually provided the best rewards since I didn't have to expend my valuable ammunition. A good instance on avoiding combat and still achieving your goals was "The Glow" you could if you had reasonable enough science skill to disarm the facilities defenses so you don't have to fight your way outta a death trap and still get the tech you needed to get into the Brotherhood.

I am glad to know that Chris was involved with Tactics. That is my favorite of the FO's, not because of the combat, but because you got to control multiple characters. The only real way to get everything out of SPECIAL.
Another drunk conquistador conquering the governor's ball...

What J.E. Sawyer said is true. But having the playerbase gain access to alot of the tech tree early on RP wise is not a viable option. IF you persist in doing that then you′re in for a fast paced shoot em up type of game. That makes what Chris said more true to the Fallout spirit/legacy. Therefor i agree with him.

What made Fallout such a legendary game was not the balancing perfection of everything but on the contrary the flaws in that inbalance along with an outstanding game feeling. In other words FO1 and FO2 was a darker more "realistic" Fallout world than FO:NV could ever be.

Fallout is about survival not gun control.

I think this deserves a "Here here" Another drunk conquistador conquering the governor's ball...