Remake of Fallout 1 like fallout 3? : Fallout Series Discussion

» Fri May 06, 2011 5:38 pm

To true, can't really disagree with that, but there are people remaking it, how about a bit of funding or support (from Beth) to let them finish it and Beth diverts very little to the cause keeping all of the people happy all of the time lol while beth concentrate the vast majority of resources on a new game? Even sparing a little of their time to consult or assist may yield great results, may not take that much.

While some people believe Fallout 1&2 is fine, I DON'T! You have your iso turn based game, other gamers want an updated FO3 style version and they should have it! :hubbahubba:

I can't really see a major company like Bethesda funding and placing their official brand and approval on a fan project. Is Beth even allowed to do that according to their contract with Interplay?
Anyway, if you want to see that game so badly you should donate to that project :whisper:

» Fri May 06, 2011 7:07 pm

I can't really see a major company like Bethesda funding and placing their official brand and approval on a fan project. Is Beth even allowed to do that according to their contract with Interplay?
Anyway, if you want to see that game so badly you should donate to that project :whisper:

I think it would be really nice to see something like that, I hope then Beth stand back and let them finish it at least, if I had any spare cash I'd be happy to donate but my contract finishes on Dec 10th and then I'm turfed onto the Dole (Welfare) queue, so soon enough I won't have any cash for such things. I'm presuming what they produce will be PC only and I'm a console gamer whereas Beth have the Mind & Muscle to make it a universal game for all gaming platforms. I'd really like to see that. That would be something worthy for a Big? gaming producer to do.

» Sat May 07, 2011 1:10 am

You obviously don't like the first 2 games, remaking them to be FPS's won't change that.

» Fri May 06, 2011 6:40 pm

You obviously don't like the first 2 games, remaking them to be FPS's won't change that.

I think they are pretty good, but I seriously dislike PC gaming and the turn based combat was quite annoying but overall they're not bad, I liked Tactics more but my BoS file keeps crashing the game and sticking a Linux system on my PS3 requires a bit of cash for a couple of things and a lot of effort. Remaking them into a real time combat FPS is all I want I trust my own skill (if it can be called that) in combat, stuff I cud destroy in any other FPS (eventually) is just an absolute pain in turn based combat for me, but they're good games, just the gaming platform and TBC annoys the hell outta me. I wanna look my enemy in the eye before he/she/it dies in an explosion of blood lol

» Sat May 07, 2011 12:08 am

RPG's are not about YOUR skill, its about your characters skill, thats whats wrong with Real Time RPG's in my opinion.

» Sat May 07, 2011 12:22 am

RPG's are not about YOUR skill, its about your characters skill, thats whats wrong with Real Time RPG's in my opinion.

Very interesting point, I'm gonna have to think about that.

» Sat May 07, 2011 3:11 am

Yeah, this idea does get tossed around quite frequently. It was some time ago, but I seem to remember an interview with some of the Bethesda devs where they (jokingly) predicted that it would only be a matter of time before someone recreated the original Fallout games using the GECK. Honestly, that's probably more likely than a AAA company going through all that work to remaster a game into something quite different.

Just in terms of logistics - you're looking at making an entirely new world map, populating it with NPCs and enemies, designing all of the levels, etc. And then all of the quests, dialog, and so on. With all of the work that would have to go into something like this - you almost might as well just be making an entirely new game. The two are so different, really the only thing you could re-use would be the dialog and voice-overs.

Personally, I likely wouldn't play a "Fallout 3-style" remake of Fallout 1 or 2. For starters, I've been playing those games for well over a decade now - I wouldn't be interested in spending money on something I essentially already own (and have long since played to death.) For another, I'm just not a fan of the concept of "retooling" classics, in general. I mean, you'd never consider doing a remake of Citizen Kane, after all. The old games are what they are - they stand on their own qualities. Best to just leave it as is, essentially.

Probably the most extreme reworking I'd be interested in (though it's not like I'd be offended or anything, either way - I'm just talking about what I'd actually be interested in playing, myself,) would be a graphical update to the game. (Like Sierra used to do with their old adventure games on occasion.) Fallout 1 with the same game mechanics, levels, etc - but with advanced 3D graphics, etc - but which was otherwise exactly the same, that I'd possibly be interested in (though even - probably not.)

I have to say I agree with this wholey. I love both the originals and new Fallouts exaclty the way they are. Although...I would love to see FO3 or NV made in the style of the original games. It would bring a much needed nostalgia factor to RPGs, which only Blizard is delivering with Diablo 3. While I'm at it, I would also love a full fledged console editon of an Elder Scrolls game using Fallout 1's engine.

» Sat May 07, 2011 7:59 am

I'm waiting for an isometric turn based mod for New Vegas.

» Sat May 07, 2011 6:01 am

RPG's are not about YOUR skill, its about your characters skill, thats whats wrong with Real Time RPG's in my opinion.

All the more reason for e Real-time RPG remake then

I'm not prepared to let the computer make dopey mistakes on my behalf during a fight, especially when you know yourself "I can make the shot", or I can kill those guys easily if I wasn't so limited by TB combat and movement. While VATS in FO 3 & Vegas is essentially (nearly) the same (your stats decide whats what) it can be tolerated until your character levels up a bit more but I'm more of a freestyle Gunner using Vats and No Vats in combat. Its the freedom of movement I want during a fight that TB doesn't give me, I like to move around or in and out of cover or running and gunning or a fighting withdrawal which TB doesn't provide me with enuff leverage and it wastes points on movement when I cud be shooting at the same time. So lets have a remake, I want my freedom in games for movement and combat, I want a remake

REMAKE! REMAKE! REMAKE!

I like the 1st two FOs I just want my FREEDOM! I prefered Tactics, why? I think you know already.

» Fri May 06, 2011 8:42 pm

So you don't want an RPG then.

» Sat May 07, 2011 4:34 am

You can move in and out of cover in a TB system.....

» Fri May 06, 2011 7:43 pm

So you don't want an RPG then.

I like the detail of RPGs

leveling up, assigning points, picking perks etc repairing armour and weapons and I like their modifying stats as well. I love the depth of detail RPGs bring, which is one of the reasons I like Oblivion as a game.

I'm well aware of what TB is capable of Andaius, so I can move in and out of cover with lightning quickness that I can in RT, I know TB represents 3 or 4 seconds in time, I'm not a complete moron you know theres still a little bit of grey-matter up there, its just it uses up points and means less shots if any after you've moved plus I can only travel so far, which is why I like Real Time. Why I prefer FO3, Vegas and Tactics over the first two games, don't get me wrong they are good games the 1st two but I want zee RT, I am a guns blazing gamer first and I know the first 2 games require a little more tact than that but they were still enjoyable enuff games. As for BoS and I've said this B 4, would have been better with a couple more levels and a whole lot more depth and it what have been a better game all round.

I can appreciate the tactical nature of TB and the thought that can goes into planning your next move etc etc but RT brings its own tactical quick thinking into the mix

TB, It limits what exactly I can do which is why it annoys the hell outta me.

But still REMAKE REMAKE REMAKE!

» Fri May 06, 2011 6:40 pm

Will never ever happen, not even by a mod team, it will fall apart, like so many remake mods before it.

» Sat May 07, 2011 12:51 am

All the more reason for e Real-time RPG remake then

I'm not prepared to let the computer make dopey mistakes on my behalf during a fight, especially when you know yourself "I can make the shot"

It's not the computer that makes the mistakes, it's your character that does. Similarly, it's not about whether *you* can make the shot, it's whether *your character* can. In a TB RPG your characters are only capable of doing the things you taught (so to speak) them to do through the skill points. If you are able able to hijack the action from them, it's no longer the character making a shot, but you. You're essentially removing the RP from RPG.

» Sat May 07, 2011 5:27 am

You're essentially removing the RP from RPG.

That is a valid point you make there. But still you have the RPG FO1&2, would it be completely a bad thing for me to try to get it remade into something more akin to what I want 2 play? I love the concept of the FO series, all the races and locations and weapons and armours, I want to be in control rather than the dice. Oh Agent_Cs here, I'm in trouble now lol

I'm only kidding C.

» Sat May 07, 2011 7:56 am

Something I would be incredibly concerned about in any remake is the temptation to make things "better".

Look at Fallouts 1, 2, Van Buren and New Vegas (as they have common designers). Looking through those games (or in the case of VB, its design documents) you can see the refinement of game creation. In Fallout 1 there are many quests you can only complete one way and some skills that are only used once or twice a game - compare this Van Buren's design documents where you can see that balancing the use of each skill and multiple paths for different character types was very important so that skills like Doctor and Science have a use in game (and you can see further refinements of this in NV).

Look at Sulik in FO2 with his cut quest to find his sister - this is clearly a prototype for the companion quests in NV; Marcus not coming with you without completing quests in Broken Hills also bears resemblence to you having to do quests for Boone before he'll join you.

If you were to rebuild these gamess today, you'd have to face the urge to make these "corrections" or "Improvements" - Add Sulik's sister in, Character Upgrade quests, new solutions to old quests (eg- Convince a drug addicted guard to get Hightowers' neclace for you, collapse the entrance to the Mother Deathclaw's den rather than kill her directly).

The question is, do we want them? I know theres a lot of success with Killap's patches, but if it were an official thing we end up risking a Metroid: Zero Mission situation.

» Fri May 06, 2011 11:28 pm

Something I would be incredibly concerned about in any remake is the temptation to make things "better".

Look at Fallouts 1, 2, Van Buren and New Vegas (as they have common designers). Looking through those games (or in the case of VB, its design documents) you can see the refinement of game creation. In Fallout 1 there are many quests you can only complete one way and some skills that are only used once or twice a game - compare this Van Buren's design documents where you can see that balancing the use of each skill and multiple paths for different character types was very important so that skills like Doctor and Science have a use in game (and you can see further refinements of this in NV).

but if it were an official thing we end up risking a Metroid: Zero Mission situation.

Don't get me wrong C, I like the use of skills, I ain't got a problem with them, it adds to the game

I'm up for as close to the original as poss, maybe a a couple of more random locations thrown in, for running around exploration kinda thing.

As for Metroid Prime, I'm gonna agree with you, I've seen the games but never played them, so I can't comment with any authority but I'm not inclined to play Metroid P.

I'm happy for accuracy in recreating the originals with a little extra, I like the different skills, it adds to the kinda depth I want, but as I've stated I wanna make the shot not a dice role. Keep them as close as possible to the originals, but I want something closer to Vegas and FO3, I want the freedom to fight as I like to fight in games. As NT8 says it removes the RP from RPG but FO3 and Vegas have already done this and they are still classed as RPG games regardless of whether they are or not the fact is they are still RPGs and so is Oblivion but with NT8s rationale they are not RPGs anymore. So what are they??? I class them as Shooter/RPG games, maybe because of the depth and story telling, the dialogue etc.

Then FO3 shouldn't have won RPG of this year or that year or critics RPG this and that.

Lets remake them and just before I came on the forums I noticed someone is actually remaking the film Total Recall. Tis the season for remakes me thinks

» Fri May 06, 2011 8:08 pm

That is a valid point you make there. But still you have the RPG FO1&2, would it be completely a bad thing for me to try to get it remade into something more akin to what I want 2 play? I love the concept of the FO series, all the races and locations and weapons and armours, I want to be in control rather than the dice. Oh Agent_Cs here, I'm in trouble now lol

I'm only kidding C.

I'm not really *against* a remake at all. I wouldn't be interested in it in the slightest, but I don't have any problem with it. If people want to make it, I honestly say good luck.

» Sat May 07, 2011 5:49 am

I'm not really *against* a remake at all. I wouldn't be interested in it in the slightest, but I don't have any problem with it. If people want to make it, I honestly say good luck.

Nice one

But honestly though would you really ignore an FO3 style game remake, deep down wouldn't you wanna try it once or even look at it or pick it up when it got cheap, did you buy New Vegas? Did you like it? put aside the fact that its a new game did you like it? Did you like FO3? Did you play it or buy? I still have my original copy of DOOM on the PS1 if they remade it, I'd buy it.

» Fri May 06, 2011 6:38 pm

I would never play it, I'm not even curious to see how it would be.

» Sat May 07, 2011 3:44 am

Nice one

But honestly though would you really ignore an FO3 style game remake, deep down wouldn't you wanna try it once or even look at it or pick it up when it got cheap, did you buy New Vegas? Did you like it? put aside the fact that its a new game did you like it? Did you like FO3? Did you play it or buy? I still have my original copy of DOOM on the PS1 if they remade it, I'd buy it.

Nah, not really. Since you mentioned Doom, let me put it this way: Doom is my #1 one game of all times, above even of Fallout. I've been playing it since I was like 6. After they released the source code a few years ago there was a port called ZDoom, which was essentially the same game plus jumping (admittedly, completely redundant :laugh: ), freelooking and crosshair. I played and loved it. There was also a mod for Doom 3 which remade the entire first 2 games into the new engine. Again, I played it and found it totally awesome, and might had even paid for it if it weren't free. But the thing is, despite all the differences, in all instances they were in essence still the same games, in the sense that everything I liked about the originals remained. If on the other hand, they remade it so it became, say, TB isometric, I can assure you I wouldn't even bother looking at screenshots. TB-ISO is IMO a worse way to present Doom than RT-FP, just like I think RT-FP is a bad way to present Fallout.

Now as for the other games, yeah, I did buy both F3 and NV, and enjoyed them for that matter (NV aloooooot more than F3 :whisper:). Even though both were presented in a (IMO) inferior manner, they still had a new story which I wanted to experience. A remake however wouldn't even have that novelty factor, I already know the originals' story backwards and forwards. So between playing 2 games with the same story, I'll just stick to the one with the better gameplay :user:

» Fri May 06, 2011 11:14 pm

I agree, Doom has always been an FPS, so a remake would not bug me, but Fallout always have (and should be) Isometric and Turn Based, so remaking it as a dumb shooter bugs me, a lot.

its like remaking Oblivion as a Flight Sim.

» Sat May 07, 2011 5:43 am

Really dedicated Fallout One and Fallout Two fans remaking the originals word for word location by location would be awesome. Nothing against Beth or Obsidian. Its just that I don't want to see the originals hacked apart due to new laws and standerds. The originals got away with things that can't be done now. Also I don't want to see the vault made to look like the Vaults of FO3 and New Vegas.

» Sat May 07, 2011 5:51 am

I would not have problem if, and ONLY if, Bethesda/Obsidian/Whoever absolutely does not take creative license on the game. Fallout and Fallout 2 are great as they are story wise. If Fallout was turned into merely Fallout 3-D I'd have no issues. But if it became 'my take on how Fallout took place' I'd be royally angry.

@KyleM- I think your stance is very luddite in terms of changing it up. Merely changing the gameplay style of Fallout or Fallout 2 would not be a problem, it's like how some game companies now make games with no purpose to the older ones (The Goldeneye game for Wii comes to mind) to me, careful and detailed attention to the game by developers and fans is required. to call it a dumb shooter remake would be biased as well, take a look at how much of Fallout and Fallout 2 were combat oriented.

» Sat May 07, 2011 7:32 am

I would not have problem if, and ONLY if, Bethesda/Obsidian/Whoever absolutely does not take creative license on the game. Fallout and Fallout 2 are great as they are story wise. If Fallout was turned into merely Fallout 3-D I'd have no issues. But if it became 'my take on how Fallout took place' I'd be royally angry.

The problem is that most remake developers fall into this trap. The only decent remake I've ever played is Real Myst because it took the original Myst (a 2D 1993 pre-rendered static scene adventure game) and turned it into a fully 3D real time adventure game. They tacked an extra world on for after you complete the rest of the game, but everything prior to that was exactly as it was in the original game; just with extra details. Most remake developers don't do this though; they have to make it BIGGER and BETTER and CHANGE lots of things with the story to fit THEIR vision! In the end, they usually butcher the product instead.

I don't think a Fallout 1/2 remake would work, anyway. Fallout 1/2 cover a lot of terrain, Fallout 3/New Vegas' game worlds would be the equivalent of one or two squares on the Fallout 1/2 world maps. Unless you kept the world map travel system of the original games it just wouldn't work. I can understand a little world map compression for Fallout 3/New Vegas since they cover what... 20 miles in each direction? But the amount of compression that would be required to make Fallout 1/2 fully open world would be absolutely ridiculous... I can only suspend my disbelief so much.