Fallout 3/Oblivion Comparison

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 1:41 am

[QUOTE=DesR85]I don't mind that Bethseda is working on Fallout 3. Using the same engine from Oblivion sounds okay but at least they could improve the animation of main characters and NPCs from Oblivion.

The camera angle for Fallout 3 should be in 3rd person just like Fable: The Lost Chapters since I don't particularly like the top-down camera view used by most PC RPGs such as Neverwinter Nights, Baldur's Gate and others. I mean, come on., shouldn't you have a more dynamic view rather than looking from the sky? Also, the 3rd person RPGs for the PCs are very few and with Fallout 3 as a 3rd person RPG, it will add to the collection to this category.

As for the controls, I hope they use the W, A, S, D movement keys and the mouse for the 3rd person camera view. I don't particularly like using the mouse for movement/interact/attack. Gets kind of like a 'click' fest after a while.

And lastly, the combat had to be real-time to attract casual gamers and non-RPG players so that at least they have the incentive to try out the game instead of making the game very unfriendly to people who are new to the RPG genre.[/QUOTE]

In NwN you can zoom/rotate the camera into practically 3rd person view if you wanted. It isn't only a top-down birds eye view.
The advantage of a birds eye view is that when you have a party, you have better overview of the situation. You can't get the same overview of a situation in First Person view, and even third person view sometimes causes problems with angles. And Fable is an excellent example of this, where the view sometimes is obscured so you can't target the enemies but they can target you - no thanks. Give me a real view of the situation

Also I disagree with this "the game needs to be so easy" type thinking. It is a bad way of thinking, and it - in my view - springs form the console world and it is effecting gameplay and replay values by removing challenges other then adding 5 enemies instead of 3 and calling it difficult.

As for combat being real time, it would requier a major change of the Fallout method of combat and eleminate pretty much most tactical advantage of party members - if indeed a party is even present. Besides, I fail to see why turn based combat is more user-unfriendly then real time for new RPG players?
However, I do not doubt that the combat will be real time, although I don't think it'll go down well (with me at least). The combat system in Morrowind and Daggerfall was bad in my view. Sitting and swinging, no thanks, I just felt stupid doing so.

I know I'll not get a Fallout game which I'd enjoy, meaning it will not be a RPG because I frankly think the genre is on its deadbed with all these new RPG-"lite" which are more action then RP - the gamedevelopment has passed me and my kin by and now caters to the console generation with fast actionfilled and easy gameplay.

/signed grumpy old man

DesR85 · Post by **DesR85** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:41 am

[QUOTE=Xandax]In NwN you can zoom/rotate the camera into practically 3rd person view if you wanted. It isn't only a top-down birds eye view.
The advantage of a birds eye view is that when you have a party, you have better overview of the situation. You can't get the same overview of a situation in First Person view, and even third person view sometimes causes problems with angles. And Fable is an excellent example of this, where the view sometimes is obscured so you can't target the enemies but they can target you - no thanks. Give me a real view of the situation

[/QUOTE]
In Fable, you can adjust the viewing angle to be further from your character but that's about it. It will give you a wider viewing angle but I agree with you that its still restrictive. Anyway, I hated first person RPGs since to me, the viewing angle is the most restrictive compared to other viewing angles like 3rd person or top-down.

[QUOTE=Xandax]
Also I disagree with this "the game needs to be so easy" type thinking. It is a bad way of thinking, and it - in my view - springs form the console world and it is effecting gameplay and replay values by removing challenges other then adding 5 enemies instead of 3 and calling it difficult.[/QUOTE]
I agree with you. I don't mind if the gameplay is easy to grasp but I will be turned off if the game goes by this type of leveling system such as in Oblivion where you sneak around, your stealth level increase by each pace. Also, I wish that the AI in RPGs could be improved like making them be able to exploit weaknesses or try to flank you as an example.

[QUOTE=Xandax]
As for combat being real time, it would requier a major change of the Fallout method of combat and eleminate pretty much most tactical advantage of party members - if indeed a party is even present. Besides, I fail to see why turn based combat is more user-unfriendly then real time for new RPG players?
However, I do not doubt that the combat will be real time, although I don't think it'll go down well (with me at least). The combat system in Morrowind and Daggerfall was bad in my view. Sitting and swinging, no thanks, I just felt stupid doing so.
[/QUOTE]
I knew I should've edited my previous post.

I meant to say that both turn-based and real-time are user-friendly just as long as the gameplay is easy to grasp. The reason why I liked real-time is because you have more control over your character, how he/she moves and fights. The bad thing is that you don't need much thinking just to defeat an enemy. Just keep hacking and that's it. Will also get repetitive overtime.

[QUOTE=Xandax]
/signed grumpy old man

[/QUOTE]
Since when were you ever grumpy?

You did mention some very good and important points in your statement after all.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:55 am

[QUOTE=DesR85]<snip>
Since when were you ever grumpy?

You did mention some very good and important points in your statement after all.

[/QUOTE]

I'm a grumpy old man because I dislike the direction RPGs and games in genral have taken over the last couple of years to easy fast paced action which requier the brainpower of wetblankets, which seems to be the way the "youth" want games.
And that's what I fear will happen to Fallout 3 as well given Bethesda's trackrecord.

Malta Soron · Post by **Malta Soron** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 7:13 am

Well, at least this 'youth' agrees with you

ruscavo · Post by **ruscavo** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 5:59 am

I thought the system employed by KOTOR and KOTOR2 worked reasonable well from a third person perspective. With regards to combat and party management. Gave you the option of micro managing of your teams actions or just letting them get down to it. Only had to deal with two at a time though.

Like the idea of being able to chose, because I personally prefer the isometric view but I know its not always as accessable. Unfortunately we have to realise that most companies are not making games for us anymore, just to ship as many units as humanly possible before they bring out another.

Cynical? I know.

Locutus · Post by **Locutus** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 4:50 am

[QUOTE=Foss]
Then also the fact that Oblivion was marketing as a next generation RPG and got alot of praise and has sold alot.
But to me, it was a big disspointment. Morrowind is still a better RPG IMO, and Oblivion is more like an action adventure game than an RPG.
They made Oblivion to simple and focused on alot cosmetic things instead of working on the RPG elements.
And I am affraid, simply because it was such a big success that they might try to do the same with Fallout 3.[/QUOTE]

totally agree.
as a matter of fact,this is the only thing that i fear of.i wouldnt mind any cosmetic facelifts,inevitable drastic changes in controls, view, NPC interraction, so on...as long as its complex ("complex" is a rather non-complex word when describing Fallout quest-char system).
As seen from various interviews, Bethesda seems to have a new policy on nextgen games: it considers old concepts obsolete, and not-so-attractive to the younger generation of gamers (automatically making us "older" gamers even more old,which comes as an insult on certain levels...but thats not the issue here,eh).
As i played Oblivion, the future of F3 (which was promising to me, being put in the hands of this respected firm) suddenly became abit grim.

PS This aint just a simple lament. The past has shown this "mtv" concept to overwhelm the immortal adventure genre the same way.

Kipi · Post by **Kipi** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 9:42 am

Xandax wrote:As for combat being real time, it would requier a major change of the Fallout method of combat and eleminate pretty much most tactical advantage of party members - if indeed a party is even present. Besides, I fail to see why turn based combat is more user-unfriendly then real time for new RPG players?

Agree you here. Turn based combat is FAR more newbe friendly, because it allows new players to actually study the situation, study manuals to how perform different actions and so on. And also, as mentioned here few times, it will totally ruin the S.P.E.C.I.A.L system, and thus it must be replaced. Probably it will turn out to be more like Deus Ex than Fallout...

I also fear that the developers are going to concentrate too much to how the game look like rather than the game itself. This is sad fact I have noticed in many todays games, not only in RPGs but in other games too. This is also why I liked the old way of Fallouts, since there wasn't much room for mind blowing graphics, and thus teh developers were "forced" to concentrate on the game itself.

I know I'll not get a Fallout game which I'd enjoy, meaning it will not be a RPG because I frankly think the genre is on its deadbed with all these new RPG-"lite" which are more action then RP - the gamedevelopment has passed me and my kin by and now caters to the console generation with fast actionfilled and easy gameplay.

Amen, brother!

Masa · Post by **Masa** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 3:56 am

I'm not a big fan of 3d and I think that bethesda can't do a fallout. Fallout 3 should have been made 2 years ago as Black Isle had it almost finished. If fallout 3 is going to be 1st person I will be more shocked than from the fallout tactics. I really liked the isometric view... I hope they're not going to make another oblivion.

Kipi · Post by **Kipi** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:52 am

[QUOTE=Masa]I'm not a big fan of 3d and I think that bethesda can't do a fallout. Fallout 3 should have been made 2 years ago as Black Isle had it almost finished. If fallout 3 is going to be 1st person I will be more shocked than from the fallout tactics. I really liked the isometric view... I hope they're not going to make another oblivion.[/QUOTE]

One question:
WHere do you base that Fallout 3, made by BlackIsle, was almost finished?
As far as I know, it was somewhat ready, but not nearly almost finished...

Masa · Post by **Masa** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 6:08 am

Well from [url="http://www.gamespot.com/news/2004/07/13/news_6102442.html"]Gamespot interview[/url]

GS: Will Bethesda's Fallout 3 retain any elements of the "Van Buren" game that was in development at Black Isle Studios? Reports are that it was nearly complete.

TH: No, we're going to start fresh.

Ok maybe not almost finished but great deal of the work had been done still.

GB: At the time of the studios' closure, how much of Fallout 3 had been completed? How much more development time do you feel the title needed before it could have been considered "complete"?

John: The engine was about 95% done. You could create characters, use skills, perform both ranged and melee combat, save/load games, and travel across maps. We had a tutorial level done that would let you do all of the above. All areas but one had been designed. About 75% of the dialogs were done and at least 50% of the maps. We had character models and monster models.

If Interplay had supported us as they had promised and given us needed resources from other divisions we would have finished the game on time. Possibly even ahead of schedule.

And Yes I'm still bitter about Interplay's decicion to choose console over PC.

Shao-Loki · Post by **Shao-Loki** » Tue Oct 03, 2006 6:49 pm

How about 1st person AND Isometric?

Well. Having played Morrowind (my puter won't run Oblivion) and both Fallouts (though I have yet to beat 2), I can see the benefits of both veiw perspectives.

But what if you could do BOTH? Maybe explore the world in first person, and combat in isometric? Or maybe a toggle option? With some of the more advanced RTS games out there, and (perhaps this isn't a good example, but I'll use it anyway), Dungeon Keeper, you can go from isometric to chase cam to 1st person view. I don't see any reason why Bethesda couldn't, with a little imaginitive control configuration and programming, let you switch on the fly between your perspectives.

I also picked up Fallout after playing Morrowind for about a year. I remember thinking, "how cool would this be if it were a fusion of this awesome world and the first-person tech from Morrowind?"

In the end, it doesn't matter what I want. Bethesda is going to make a game, hopefully true to it predecessors, and it's going to have a certain perspective. Whatever that perspective is, I'm going to play it. I don't particularly care what they do, as long as they don't turn it into a heap of trash...which I doubt Bethesda is capable of doing.

-Loki

The Z · Post by **The Z** » Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:44 pm

As mentioned above, it doesn't make a difference to me if the game's 3D or if it's 2D. As long as Bethseda stays true to the Fallout atmosphere (with a large amounts of quest both interesting and frivilous, with that vintage humor, with the ability to play both good and evil with benefits/disadvantages to both, with witty and engaging dialogue) I will like the game. If they gut the Fallout atmosphere and make it Morrowind with guns I'll be disappointed because that's not what Fallout's about.

DesR85 · Post by **DesR85** » Tue Oct 03, 2006 11:45 pm

Shao-Loki wrote: But what if you could do BOTH? Maybe explore the world in first person, and combat in isometric? Or maybe a toggle option? With some of the more advanced RTS games out there, and (perhaps this isn't a good example, but I'll use it anyway), Dungeon Keeper, you can go from isometric to chase cam to 1st person view. I don't see any reason why Bethesda couldn't, with a little imaginitive control configuration and programming, let you switch on the fly between your perspectives.

I also picked up Fallout after playing Morrowind for about a year. I remember thinking, "how cool would this be if it were a fusion of this awesome world and the first-person tech from Morrowind?"

I have not played Fallout before but I've seen someone played this game and I'm not sure if Bethseda can pull of an isometric view let alone even 3rd person view. The First Person view in both Oblivion and Morrowind is solid, true, but when you switch to 3rd person view, it feels awkward and quite difficult to play at times, so I'm not sure if they can even pull of an isometric view for this game. Oh well, best to wait for further details from Bethseda.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Wed Oct 04, 2006 1:00 am

Shao-Loki wrote:Well. Having played Morrowind (my puter won't run Oblivion) and both Fallouts (though I have yet to beat 2), I can see the benefits of both veiw perspectives.

But what if you could do BOTH? Maybe explore the world in first person, and combat in isometric? Or maybe a toggle option? With some of the more advanced RTS games out there, and (perhaps this isn't a good example, but I'll use it anyway), Dungeon Keeper, you can go from isometric to chase cam to 1st person view. I don't see any reason why Bethesda couldn't, with a little imaginitive control configuration and programming, let you switch on the fly between your perspectives.

I also picked up Fallout after playing Morrowind for about a year. I remember thinking, "how cool would this be if it were a fusion of this awesome world and the first-person tech from Morrowind?"

<snip>

As long as the 3rd person/isometric view actually was usefull as opposed to what Bethesda has presented so far, I doubt anybody would mind a toggle-able 3rd/1st person view.
However, it need to be "free" to choose and it need to be a heck of a lot better then what was presented in Morrowind/Oblivion

In the end, it doesn't matter what I want. Bethesda is going to make a game, hopefully true to it predecessors, and it's going to have a certain perspective. Whatever that perspective is, I'm going to play it. I don't particularly care what they do, as long as they don't turn it into a heap of trash...which I doubt Bethesda is capable of doing.

Based on the experience I got moving from Daggerfall to Morrowind to Oblivion I am not that optimistic. Oblivion was really dumped down in its vanilla version and I fear it is waht Bethesda might do to Fallout.
However until something is released, it is fears as opposed to dislikes currently

I just know that I'll not buy Fallout 3 automatically, because it is Bethesda making it, as I likely would have if it where another company or if they hadn't dumped down Oblivion so much. They've seriously let me down and I do not trust them at all ... I simply have no faith in them being capable of making a quality game as opposed to the console RPG-lites with are more action games then anything else.

As for 3D vs. 2D then I view that debate as ... well dead horse, because even top-down/isometric games would be 3D this day and age. The days of 2D is long gone in graphic intensive mainstream companies.

Shao-Loki · Post by **Shao-Loki** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 7:41 pm

I'll grant you that (from what I've seen and read), Bethesda really did dumb-down Oblivion (and Morrowind) when compared to it's predecessor.

That said,I LIKE FALLOUT. Unless everyone is just plain SCREAMING about how bad it is, I'll probably buy it.

Of course, with the current graphics trend, I'm going to need a new puter first...

As far as perspective changing goes, when I say Isometric, I mean the Fallout style 3/4 view. When I say chase cam, I mean that lame friggin' excuse for third person that Beth used in Morrowind, aka the Tomb Raider Cam. And we all know what 1st person is.

So, as far as a toggle goes, maybe a switch between isometric (or perhaps a Neverwinter Nights style?) and 1st person "over the gun" ("over the sword?") view would be best.

-Loki

Tkwiget · Post by **Tkwiget** » Wed May 02, 2007 9:52 am

Galaga Bee wrote:Judging from Pete Hines' recent quote that they are developing Fallout 3 "just like we developed Oblivion", it would seem as if these two games will have a lot in common (duh). Not sure if this was just a reference to the fact that they attempted to include as much TES history/lore from the first 3 games into Oblivion, and will therefore be doing the same for Fallout 3, or if this was meant as "we are going through the exact same development process for Fallout 3 which we used to make Oblivion", or "We are including the same kind of RPG and gameplay aspects we included in Oblivion", or what, but anyone with half a brain can see how easy it is to make comparisons between the 2 games.

Personally, I think it's great, which is why I am posting here instead of NMA or the Codex, where I would be instantly incinerated by flames for making this post. I'm sure the RPG "purists" disagree, but my feelings are that first-person perspective and real-time combat do not diminish the RPG experience, but only enhance it instead. I can remember thinking when I played Fallout 2 how great it would be if it was a 3D, open environment, and I am really looking forward to playing Fallout 3 for that very reason (among others).

It's time for the RPG Rip VanWinkle's to wake up and smell the 2006. Top-down, iso-linear (note the word "linear"), turn-based gameplay is a thing of the past (at least as far as major titles go). You don't have to like Oblivion or Fallout 3 in their new format, but it's all you're gonna get as far as these intellectual properties go, so I suggest putting your pre-conceived notions about RPG's aside and start accepting it, cause otherwise you'll be missing out on a couple of very good games. Who cares whether or not it's a "true RPG"? They're both going to be great games, and that's good enough for me.

Oh yeah, and don't even begin to think that your pleas to the devs for a return to the olden days are going to change anything, because unless Oblivion is a financial flop (Ha! yeah right), you can expect more of the same for Fallout 3. It's not that they're not listening to you, it's just that they have no desire to make another Pong.

PS This forum rules because I'm the only one posting in it and therefore everyone who visits this forum has to read what I have to say, because there are no other alternatives. Woohoo!

Whether I like the idea of a 1st person RPG or not doesn't matter. It's an idea that a lot of game companies haven't really picked up on and some of the major ones have been doing just that. I like the classic top view of the older Fallout games. The only thing they should do now is make it with a zoom in and out feature like in Supreme Commander. But since there are many ways to keep the view angle functional without having the UI cluttering the screen is by allowing the UI to move around and so the player can customize it as well as subtract or add parts of the UI with hot keys and keyboard commands.

Although, it's about time a 1st person RPG that I'm willing to seriously play is going to get made. Too many crappy games on the shelves right now.

Celos · Post by **Celos** » Wed Jul 25, 2007 8:26 am

|
|
\/

Deadalready · Post by **Deadalready** » Tue Aug 07, 2007 10:12 am

I should point out I think graphics make up about <10% of a game but still I've decided I will upgrade my computer as necessary to play Fallout 3. I just hope proportionally more effort is spent on gameplay, character interaction and rpg character customisation.

To me the tone that Fallout 3 will follow similar design considerations to Oblivion makes me quite sad. Oblivion is a nice game but feels rather soul less to me.

Hearing that Fallout 3 will follow Oblivion's dialogue system makes me cringe... could be worse though, it could have Fable's dialogue system (Flamingo Dances).

Jazz.z · Post by **Jazz.z** » Sun Oct 28, 2007 9:21 pm

Oblivion lacks many things. Fallout 3 will be a 3d game and I hope very different from Oblivion. The differences between the fallout prequels and TESIV are quite different, and I'm not talking about the graphics or the engine but about the story, the dialogues, the cutscenes, the humour and the references to pop culture.

I would like rather that they took a look at STALKER, I'm sure they did so, because that game combined exploration, horror and action in such unique ways. Even if it's a FPS, it kind of got the touch of an RPG, with the difference that you don't have worry about levelling up or creating a character.

Not because Fallout 3 comes after 1 and 2, that means it's going to be bad. Take a look at Prince of Persia. When Ubisoft took over the franchise they managed to create such a great trilogy that overwhelmed the firsts games in absolutely every way.

Well, who knows? Let just wait and see.

Jazz.z · Post by **Jazz.z** » Sun Oct 28, 2007 9:33 pm

Xandax wrote:I just know that I'll not buy Fallout 3 automatically, because it is Bethesda making it, as I likely would have if it where another company or if they hadn't dumped down Oblivion so much. They've seriously let me down and I do not trust them at all ... I simply have no faith in them being capable of making a quality game as opposed to the console RPG-lites with are more action games then anything else.

I do not trust Bethesda either. They're so proud about Oblivion that it looks like they're going to oblivionize everything they do from now on.