Company News Bethesda buys the Fallout IP

[Deleted member 7219]

I find it gorgeously ironic that the company you hate most of all now has rights to your beloved franchise.

 

[Briosafreak]

Hmmm?... You're late a couple of years, these days most of the members that post at the Codex are refugees from the TeS forum and fansites, complaining about Bethesda and Oblivion. The times when this place had a majority of Fallout fans are gone, and in those days Herve's Interplay got the same flack as Bethesda, so nothing changed...

You are a bit confused, I guess...

 

[Avin]

I hate Blizzard more. They hate trolls.

 

[kingcomrade]

I find it gorgeously ironic that the company you hate most of all now has rights to your beloved franchise.

I think you are getting things backwards. They are the company we hate most BECAUSE they got (or were going to get) the rights to our most beloved franchise. Otherwise I doubt many people at all would care that much about Bethesda.

edit- wtf is a gorgeous irony?

 

[Avin]

And, Matt, I like Bethesda for daggerfall, hate them for Morrowind and couldn't care less about Oblivion.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I don't think many people here hate Beth for getting the Fallout license. The Fallout series had ended a long time ago, joining a long list of dead series: XCom, MMO, Ultima, Wiz, M&M, Elder Scrolls, etc. Take XCom, for example. Even if a good developer like Irrational picks up the license, I highly doubt that the game will *continue* the series. At best it would be another series that could be called any other name. Same with the Fallout license. At least it would be entertaining to watch.

As for the dislike, well, Bethesda butchered their own series, successfully adding it to the above mentioned "RIP" list, so there is your reason.

 

[stargelman]

I don't think many people here hate Beth for getting the Fallout license. The Fallout series had ended a long time ago, joining a long list of dead series: XCom, MMO, Ultima, Wiz, M&M, Elder Scrolls, etc.

That reality hasn't sunken in for everybody yet - at least as far as Fallout is concerned.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Well, considering that many people still harbor hope that FO3 will be turn-based and isometric... Like I said, it will be very entertaining.

 

[stargelman]

Well, considering that many people still harbor hope that FO3 will be turn-based and isometric... Like I said, it will be very entertaining.

I don't get that. They've basically said that's not going to happen, so how could anyone be so deluded? Oh wait. Nevermind

 

[Claw]

Are there truly people that sill believe in a turnbased Fallout?

I suspect most people who argue that it's still possible are merely modern age apologetics. Like that guy who argued that Todd Goldman's acts of plagiarism might be validated by some context unknown to him.

 

[xedoc gpr]

"I think the hardcore fans are incredibly misunderstood, and frankly, have been mistreated in the past. "
Pete Hines

 

[DarkUnderlord]

I find it gorgeously ironic that the company you hate most of all now has rights to your beloved franchise.

You say that as if we didn't hate Interplay.

 

[Joe Krow]

Well, considering that many people still harbor hope that FO3 will be turn-based and isometric... Like I said, it will be very entertaining.

FO3 could still go from first person exploration to isometric combat. It would be a decent compromise and the engine is already practically set up to do it. I'm optimistic in that regard.

Those who think combat will be turn based are on crck though. Real time with concealed stats running the show (ala Morrowind) is the best we can hope for and even that seems unlikely... if your crosshair is over your target you hit. Stats? What stats?

 

[elander_]

The owner of Bethesda is a lawyer who stole the Elderscrolls series from his founders and original owners with shitty legal and contractual tricks. They only used the Elderscrolls name to sell their mainstream crappy idea of rpgs and make as much money as they can. They won't think twice to turn the ES series into a Fable clone if they think it will give them more money. Now they ware trying to do the same with Falllout. Is practically their way of living. They only need the name for marketing then they whatever shit they think will sell best even if it's a piece of crap that has nothing to do with Fallout. Fallout is dead and so are the Elderscrolls.

 

[JarlFrank]

"I think the hardcore fans are incredibly misunderstood, and frankly, will be mistreated in the future. "
Pete Hines

Fixed.

 

[taxacaria]

I find it gorgeously ironic that the company you hate most of all now has rights to your beloved franchise.

Beth has made some games I liked in the past : Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind (with mods only).
As far as I know, a fourth part of the TES series has never been released - correct me, if I'm wrong.
So I don't hate Beth completely, I hate Beth's marketing-dictated developement policy only,
because it results in sucking dumbed down mainstream games.
I'd love to see a good RPG from Beth, but there is no more chance at all to get one.

Well, considering that many people still harbor hope that FO3 will be turn-based and isometric...

Must be the harbor of dreams.
Pandora has closed her box just before my hope was able to get out.

 

[stargelman]

FO3 could still go from first person exploration to isometric combat. It would be a decent compromise and the engine is already practically set up to do it. I'm optimistic in that regard.

That explains your title. Paper dog, asbestos cat anyone?

 

[denizsi]

Nothing relevant?

Yes, nothing at all. Character advancement != stat interaction.

You need a way to advance your char.

Who ever said anything about advancing your character? Only you. Character advancement != stat interaction.

TES model doesn't fit Fallout style at all.

Even Fallout 2 doesn't fit Fallout 1! Subtle humour (F1) vs. attention-whorism (F2). So, neither a point or relevance here.

In which way you will implement perks?

What? Daggerfall's advantage/disadvantage system is more advanced and character-defining than Fallout's perks, and those (dis)advantages work beautifully in Daggerfall. I can't say perfectly balanced though, but I can't say that for Fallout either. Obviously, both games have their flaws.

What about the attribute's advancement?

Yep, advancement is the key word, which marks the irrelevance of the arguement.

The char upgrade system of Daggerfall makes you nearly invincable after a while.

This time the keyword is.. can you guess? Oh btw, you can become practically invincible in Fallout too.

And Daggerfall combat depends much on weaponry -

And Fallout's combat doesn't depend much on weaponry? Though still, this is irrelevant yet again, because this is a specific arguement about combat type and not about the inner workings of stats to determine the outcome of a combat (ie. what I originally wrote: "stat interaction")

the fights are too short to have any visable use of stats.

Bullshit. Fights being too short has nothing to do with stats being put to use. Really, what the hell do you think happens in Daggerfall when you are attacking and being attacked? The game somehow decides to ignore stats? All the shit happens so fast, the game just can't keep up with the stat checks? Retarded statement. No really, it's that retarded. Try taking on powerful creatures with and without high skill levels in weapon skill of your choice, in critical strike, in dodging, with high and low attributes, with combat or monster related advantages/disadvantages. Get yourself the tools for making quests in Daggerfall, make one where NPCs with 100+ levels in those skills attack you and see how fucking hard it then becomes if you are not on par with them. You will die so fast, you will have completely comprehended the impact of stats without room for doubt.

No one can want Daggerfall's three-seconds-click-fights in Fallout

You mean "drag-fights"? <insert>

Let's be realistic here: Fallout 3, by Bethesda. It will be real-time, so fights will most likely be short. So wtf are you bragging about?

and Daggerfalls range weapon system isn't usable for guns

You don't see the big picture. No one is suggesting a complete and unmodified implemention of everything Daggerfall into a F3. System in Daggerfall is good because despite the fast and deadly fights, everything is completely stat-driven and even having uber head-shot skills in Counter-Skill doesn't make you better at it. All of your stats without a question, plays into the outcome. Because the rate of attack and the time it takes to prepare/draw your weapon is, you can only be as fast as your skills allow you to be. Try taking on enemies with a Speed of 10 and of 100.

So, to sum it up, Daggerfall combat is fast, deadly and completely stat-driven, and that's due to the fine interaction of stats. Not because of the setting, the flawed character advancement system, weapons present in the game or whatever. "Stat-interaction" should be the only part to take as a model.

sip isometric sip

Fallout (1&2) aren't isometric. Shocking, isn't it? Half the games you think isometric aren't isometric. Just as a right angle is an angle at 90° and it's incorrect to call a 80° or 100° angle a right angle, isometric means a specific use of parallel projection where the angles between x,y,z axes share a specific angle. Change that by 1° and it isn't isometric, but still parallel projected.

Beth has made some games I liked in the past : Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind (with mods only).

The Beth that made Arena and Daggerfall practically doesn't exist any more; staff change. Think of it like how a certain administration can work hard and good for people, while the next one does nothing but to assrape the people. Also, what elander said.

 

[Ekodas]

Fallout (1&2) aren't isometric. Shocking, isn't it? Half the games you think isometric aren't isometric. Just as a right angle is an angle at 90° and it's incorrect to call a 80° or 100° angle a right angle, isometric means a specific use of parallel projection where the angles between x,y,z axes share a specific angle. Change that by 1° and it isn't isometric, but still parallel projected.

/hijack

Consider 2 metric spaces F and G. F and G are isometric if you can set up an isometry between F and G, i.e a distance-preserving isomorphism. Basically, if "|x, y|" means "the distance or measure between x and y in the F-space", f is an isometry between F and G if f is an isomorphism and |x, y| = [f(x), f(y)] (where [ , ] is the distance in the G-space). A parallel projection is just a specif case (it's an isometry from an euclidian space on itself). You can set up isometry in fonctional spaces too etc...

Not sure if i'm clear.

Anyway, I think that 'isometric view' or 'isometric perspective' in video-games simply means that the objects on your screen got a constant size.

In a 3D games, as 'you' get closer to an object, the object gets bigger. In an isometric game, house, npcs, or whatever got a constant size (hence 'iso-metry' : same measure).

/hijack off

 

[taxacaria]

So, to sum it up, Daggerfall combat is fast, deadly and completely stat-driven, and that's due to the fine interaction of stats.

The "fast combat" comes with an action component and a big load of player's click abilities - that's in the nature of such combat. And if the player - not the char - failes to click in time, his char is slaughtered. So much on "fine interaction of stats", which is so fine that it's nearly invisible in game. I assume you meant the player's stats.

Even Fallout 2 doesn't fit Fallout 1! Subtle humour (F1) vs. attention-whorism (F2). So, neither a point or relevance here.

Who has said a word about ingame humour? That's not relevant to stats at all. So no point here.

Daggerfall's advantage/disadvantage system is more advanced and character-defining than Fallout's perks, and those (dis)advantages work beautifully in Daggerfall. I can't say perfectly balanced though, but I can't say that for Fallout either. Obviously, both games have their flaws.

Daggerfalls advantage/disadvantage system is a setup option which is used for char creation. It's not an ingame option at all. And since you have attribute's advancing in Daggerfall, it doesn't define a char precisely. I mentioned Daggerfalls "alround-chars" in a former posting.
Daggerfall : select "Unability to use Orcish materials, small shield...etc" and chose "double your magic potential" and you'll get a Warrior with an Ebony Tower Shield and enormous magic power. You call that "advanced and character defining" ? Sorry, ROFL.
And balanced Daggerfall chars? Try to play a mage with no weapon abilities, and you're kicked in the ass.
Fallout has only very few possibilities to change attributes in game, not all are positive.
So you have growing attributes in Daggerfall vs. some perks in Fallout (not at every level), which comes with disadvantages sometimes. If you create a char with INT=4 in Fallout, you have to play with him, in Daggerfall you only have to wait a few levels and that guy has turned into Einstein (Daggerfall Edition) - btw : where is the disadvantage here?
The Fallout system describes a char much more precisely, and created chars are really defined for the game.

 

[Claw]

Fallout (1&2) aren't isometric. Shocking, isn't it? Half the games you think isometric aren't isometric. Just as a right angle is an angle at 90° and it's incorrect to call a 80° or 100° angle a right angle, isometric means a specific use of parallel projection where the angles between x,y,z axes share a specific angle. Change that by 1° and it isn't isometric, but still parallel projected.

Who cares? Noone, that is who. People have been using "isometric" wrong for years, and didn't even notice the difference. I believe you're smart enough to realize that the idea they're trying to express is a different one even though they express is incorrecly. So you're just being pedantic AND miss the point or rather willingly ignore it, which is worse.

 

[denizsi]

sip

Wrong. Parallel projection is the common name of multiple projection types, of which Isometric is a sub-type. The "iso" reference there isn't a reference to the constant size in projection through out the projection plane, but the angles between the X,Y,Z axes, which are 60º each in an isometric projection. Also, there are two "brothers" of isometric, named dimetric and trixonometric, so if the "iso" reference in isometric was supposed to mean constant size through the projection plane, then what could possibly dimetric or trixonometric mean?

Examples of isometric projection:

If you distort the lines or the viewing angle in that image even by an small amount, the angles would change so it would stop being isometric, but it will still be parallel projected. Now look at this image:

It's viewed from a lower angle, but it's still a parallel projection, because there is no perspective but a constant size in all (axes). However, because only two out of three angles are equal instead of all three (as in isometric), this is a dimetric projection. If all angles were unique, it would be trixonometric projection.

Also, there is no such thing as "isometric perspective". Perspective means change or proportions in regards to the distance. You either have perspective projection or parallel (including isometric) projection.

The "fast combat" comes with an action component and a big load of player's click abilities

Bullshit. You don't even "click" for combat. Practically, you click once, hold it down and only move the mouse/cursor around to do the attacking, though even that is not random and there are different damage modifiers for swinging directions, different to each weapon type. There is no click-fest similarity. That and since how fast you can move/swing the mouse/cursor isn't a factor in determining how fast you can actually attack, saying "a big load of player's click abilities" is either a product of a retard or someone who hasn't really played the game or paid attention to it at all. However, let me add that the fastest rate of attack you can achieve is something like 4 swings per second with a Speed of 100+ (I can't tell if skill levels also affect rate of attack though), and that's still a lot more slower than your typical click-fest game, and moving/swinging the mouse is different and a whole lot easier than clicking.

And if the player - not the char - failes to click in time, his char is slaughtered. So much on "fine interaction of stats", which is so fine that it's nearly invisible in game. I assume you meant the player's stats.

More bullshit. You make it sound like there is a specific timing you must catch to do the attack (and no, not clicking). I'll tell you that there is none of the sort. If you had a different impression when (and if) you played the game, you apparently didn't pay attention. Also, you can NOT jump or move around as fast and freely as you can do in most first person games to avoid being hurt during combat, and I'm saying you can't because the engine simply doesn't receive multiple movement-related key inputs simultaneously to do such moves. You can't simultaneously even move back and forth while circling (sidestepping) around something. While attacking, you can either move back and forth only, which is unfortunately a flaw as it is practically viable for combat to a degree; or you can move sideways but then the target will move out of your aim and you will have to disrupt (stop) your attack (or mouse swings) to rotate/aim first and start attacking again.

Yet, the games does all the stat calculations, all the stat checks in each round (yes, there are rounds in the game; remember the "speed" adjustment right after character creation and before you begin the game -enemy reflexes- ? That's it). All you can achieve by moving a lot is to avoid some of these checks by moving out of the attacker's reach, but even with that, you are subject to roll checks and you can easily receive failed rolls in everything and still go down on one hit. So, you can just as well stand still and take it like a man. If you do so, the outcome is quite proportional to your stats provided by the game. If you have a high dodge level, you'll passively avoid being hit for every success roll in dodge checks; and you'll have an easier time hitting the enemies with high agility or enemies who have low dodge levels. In addition to dodging a hit completely, there are parry (or block) checks, of which you will hear the clash and clank sounds. Each of these checks are made in every instance of attack you do or done unto. You can't escape them forever no matter what you do.

Who has said a word about ingame humor? That's not relevant to stats at all. So no point here.

Don't give me shit like this. You said difference of "style". Tell me where are stats in THAT!

Daggerfalls advantage/disadvantage system is a setup option which is used for char creation.

Oh you don't do that in Fallout's character creation? :random Volournian exclamation:

It's not an ingame option at all. And since you have attribute's advancing in Daggerfall, it doesn't define a char precisely. I mentioned Daggerfalls "alround-chars" in a former posting.

In-game option of the sort= character-fucking-advancement != stat interaction. You could easily modify the system on paper to give you those options at certain levels during the game, but again, this is not related to stat interactions. You keep bringing up the flawed character advancement in Daggerfall, which is utterly irrelevant and something I don't reject anyway, so stop doing that.

Daggerfall : select "Unability to use Orcish materials, small shield...etc" and chose "double your magic potential" and you'll get a Warrior with an Ebony Tower Shield and enormous magic power. You call that "advanced and character defining" ? Sorry, ROFL.

I've already answered this:

What? Daggerfall's advantage/disadvantage system is more advanced and character-defining than Fallout's perks, and those (dis)advantages work beautifully in Daggerfall. I can't say perfectly balanced though, but I can't say that for Fallout either. Obviously, both games have their flaws.

Redding is teh hard, eh?

Try to play a mage with no weapon abilities, and you're kicked in the ass.

I did that, and I did pretty well. I also finished game once that way.

All that said, you either didn't really play the game but pretend that you did or you played but didn't pay any attention at all or simply failed to realise. Please get a fucking clue the next time and don't make it sound like I'm suggesting "all they need to do is to take Daggerfall's base rules intact and put them in F3!" (I already said this but I don't want to press hard on the mentally challenged).

 

[denizsi]

Who cares? Noone, that is who. People have been using "isometric" wrong for years, and didn't even notice the difference. I believe you're smart enough to realize that the idea they're trying to express is a different one even though they express is incorrecly. So you're just being pedantic AND miss the point or rather willingly ignore it, which is worse.

I read that about half the Americans can't tell Iraq from Vietnam on the map. That's quite a number (close to 150 millions?), so who the fuck cares about where either of them really is? The point is that Americans are "bringing teh freddom and demo-kracy" to Iraq and their sons are there doing the dirty work, so I don't understand why the news channels keep showing a map of the region in related news.

All you can say at best is that I'm acting idealistically. Pointless? Perhaps. Then again, I feel better also by using "they're" correctly as opposed to millions of people, especially the native English speakers among them. What do you think about that?

 

[stargelman]

How about that. They have a "community manager" now.

 

[Claw]

All you can say at best is that I'm acting idealistically. Pointless? Perhaps. Then again, I feel better also by using "they're" correctly as opposed to millions of people, especially the native English speakers among them. What do you think about that?

Using "they're" correctly is one thing. Berating others for failing to do so is another. Besides, all mistakes aren't equal. Not being able to use "they're" correctly is pathetic, not knowing the correct definition of "isometric" isn't. It's merely ignorant.