Of course other people's opinion are allowed, and mine is the best. Well, Hallalujah!

Well, there is something wrong with it. TB games give folks all the time they need to plan. ISO POV is great for that, because the player can see all his "units" FP POV is more about action. It's more about "I need to do this NOW" kind of feeling.

Don't get me wrong here, i think it would be highly interesting to see a TB FP game. It would slow combat down enough to make tactical decisions, and it would force the player to limit POV to what the character actually sees.

Yeah, turn-based in 3D I think would work better with a free-cam than anything else. Limiting it to first-person I can't see as being anything more than a gimmick. It would be interesting if you could use it to figure out line of sight, though. (Picking your moves with a free-cam, and then selecting your attacks via first-person.)

It would be more difficult, tactics wise, because you may not see the disposition of enemy forces, nor would you be able to see over the hill, behind the house, across the wall, etc. It's certainly more realistic though. I wonder how well received it would be to the TB/ISO crowd?

ive been waiting for a fallout type game with interactive turn-based/strategy enemy encounters.

i have no game development skill or understanding, but, why cant a 1st/3rd person game like fallout3, oblivion, etc.
change to a temporary turn-based/strategy game for the combat encounters?

all npc's and characters in the combat zone get targeted and you can then use specific buttons (console) for the action and camera. combat rules
get enforced and you get a nice switch from real-time.

or something along those lines. a more 'hardcoe' fallout3 with lots of gameplay options in the start screen, i feel, would have still sold well.

QFT!

This isn't about people who disliked or liked Fallout, but rather it has everything to do with what sells in the modern market.

What sells in the modern AAA cross-platform game market. Fallout was never meant to be one.

That's kind of like saying that the US was never meant to contain 50 states.

The only way to fix it is to never make another Fallout. Might make you happy. but lots of us appreciate that we got a good Fallout, no matter how different it is from the originals.

I can say as a non-TB/ISO modern day wanting person. This is exactly what I expected from a 2008 Fallout production.


I've tried to make this one of my main points in the past. People go along with the excuse that FO3 has to be mainstream and appeal to the masses. Which yes is the smartest business decision. But the game could of still made an improvement, and comprimise for the 'hardcoe' just enough and still would have sold volumes in both markets.


I don't think that makes it right though. If you look at it from a mass market perspective, the mass market already has ALOT of choice, if there was something they feel they would have missed out on there would have been something already on the horizon to pique their interest again. If someone waits 10 years to find out a franchise they loved has been stripped of many important aspects that made it great, that wave is never going to come around to satiate the loss. That's it, it's taken away forever. I ponder why Beth had to take Fallout and butcher it, seeing as they've taken anything good from previous games. They may aswell just gone with their own title and left out Fallout altogether. Unless they enjoy giving the finger to fans of franchises that weren't originally owned by them, then it makes a sick kindof sense.

Well, that's the joy of free market economics. The greater demands get filled and the lesser demands do not.

Again, "butcher" is in the eyes of the beholder. I rather like what they did in FO3. I'd like to see it have more RP impact, and some other things could be improved, but otherwise I like it.

Or simply to make it a more niche game, like the originals were, instead of a mass market game? Believe me, not all games have to be AAA titles with ridiculously high budgets.

Seems to me that BIS WENT [censored] UP with their niche games. So did Troika.

It's not actually, although then again the US was never "meant' to have 50 states, unless the founding fathers had a Grand Plan, heh. There are games that are meant to get mass appeal (and as a consequence, surrender something of themselves to do it) and others that are a niche market Your nice dig at Troika and BIS' failure aside, Fallout was never meant to be the Quake II of Interplay (there's a quote by Cain or Avellone which mentions this, I think).

Biz was terminated. Interplay screwed up with FOBOS (among other things) and lost it.
Troika IIRC had trouble caused by conflicts with Valve, and I think a deal with Activision(?) went sour.
I dunno exactly (really scratching my head to remember)... but it was not for their choice of game style. Black Isle & Troika made the best RPG's around.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE? Everytime somebody says they liked the game it turns into a huge argument "Oh it wasn't enough like fallout 1 &2" "I know but it's still fun" "TOO BAD IT WASN'T ENOUGH LIKE THEM SO I DON'T WANT YOU TO ENJOY IT." ....seriously.

I forgot, praise demands more praise be heaped upon it I suppose.

You avoided my main point there :/ They could have done what they did in FO3 without using Fallout, butcher or not. Did they just want the rights to S.P.E.C.I.A.L? Because they mutilated that in such a way that suggests they would have been more happier with one of their own systems anyway. Fallout could have been left for someone that actually wanted to represent it, and I would gladly of waited another 10 years for that, and Bethesda could have made their "Oblivion with guns" with a few skin conversions.


Finally, this is the first time I've heard someone say that. Where there's a will there's a way. I guess will's on an extended leave of absence.



Amen

All I'm saying is people should take "debates" like these to a completely different thread. This game being like\not like Fallout 1 & 2 has nothing to do with the original post.

Yes well..Things don't always turn out the way we want them

Oh and that's a perfect excuse for derailing every thread somebody makes that explains why they enjoyed the game. :shakehead: These arguments are starting to become a little childish, big fancy lingo and 8 paragraphs a post or not.

I don't see anything wrong with it, it's not exactly a requirement that if someone posts a thread such as this that the only replies be constantly affirming the person's POV. If someone posted "This game svcks!", people are free to come in and tell him why he's wrong, it's the nature of forums.

And so they did, but even the best RPGs never approached the sales volume of many other types of games. RPGs have always been a niche market.

This hybridization of the genre has probably saved it from oblivion. (or ont...pun intended). Without this move to hibrids, we would see even fewer RPGs than we already do.

:lol: LP's are a niche market too, but they are better for those that can appreciate them.
~on a side note...Its been shown that music compressed via MP3 or the like (that strips out what it thinks people can't hear), actually results in a music sampling that affects the listener's emotions less than their anolog originals.

Some would say that this is already happening.

I hope you're not talking about FPS-RPG hybridization, because I doubt that's saved anything (aside from effort on some people's behalf, heh).