Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[RickiusMaximus]

I think they should have called it "Fallout 1b: A game set in the fallout universe but is not necessarily related to the original but we'd like to cash in on the name"

Other than that it looks good and I can’t wait to try it.

Also, anyone who complains that the interface is lacking or requires two many clicks YOUR ON A FORUM DISCUSSING DWARF FORTRESS FOR CHRIST SAKES

[Ioric Kittencuddler]

you just *want* to hate it.
it makes you .. .different.
if f3 wuld look exaclty like f2, you wuld still hate it. because they wuld have missed a chance to make it better. because even if it looks alike, its still not the same, because the heroes made the prequel didnt made it. because the one button in the menue has a different colour.

anyway, i feel quite uncomfortable here... by the same reason i wont doom it without a proper base of judgement, i dont realy want to it without.

Yes, that is the most reasonable conclusion you could reach given the facts that I have repeatedly pointed out the game's flaws and stated my reasons for disliking it.  I just *want* to hate it.

Did you ever consider the possibility that maybe you just *want* to love it?  Maybe it's you who is being irrational.  I haven't seen you make any reasoned arguments.  All you've done is show either hostility or dismissiveness to anyone who didn't agree with you, while fixating on a notion that the only reason people who don't like Fallout 3 feel that way is because it doesn't use 2d graphics and isn't isometric.  You've completely ignored all arguments to the contrary, repeatedly stating your confusion as to why anyone wouldn't like Fallout 3 despite it being repeatedly explained.  Finally, you've done all of this while showing a complete disregard for spelling, grammar, punctuation, and capitalization.  That just shows laziness.

I think they should have called it "Fallout 1b: A game set in the fallout universe but is not necessarily related to the original but we'd like to cash in on the name"

Other than that it looks good and I can’t wait to try it.

Also, anyone who complains that the interface is lacking or requires two many clicks YOUR ON A FORUM DISCUSSING DWARF FORTRESS FOR CHRIST SAKES

Yes, Dwarf Fortress, a free, Indie, ASCII graphics based game in the alpha stages of development that is complex to the point of insanity and is becoming more so every day.  If it were being made by a triple A studio instead of 2 guys, one of whom lives off donations and does all the coding himself, were being sold instead of being free, were actually considered complete instead of being an alpha, used an engine capable of modern day graphics, and was as simplistic as Fallout 3, I would have a problem.  As things are, I don't.

[Jetman123]

You can't be serious...  Are you seriously trying to tell me that people now days are too stupid to deal with the character sheet Fallout had 10 years ago?  That their brains will lock up if they see something that worked perfectly fine ten years ago? That... Actually you know what?  That's probably exactly what Bethesda thinks too.  That's the whole problem with the gaming industry now days.  Game companies make games assuming that their customers are total idiots.  Wow, thanks for that epiphany.  Though it doesn't make me feel any better realizing that Fallout is being designed to cater to people whose brains shut down when they see more than seven stats on screen at once.

I never said anything about the general intelligence level of those who play games, only that maybe some people don't _want_ a screen full of numbers, stats and miscellany that you don't _need_ to know except in certain situations. Optional traits? Perks? _Carry weight limit_? _Critical chance?_ Why, pray tell, do I need to know any of that when I'm opening my sheet in the middle of combat trying to figure out if I've got a high enough stat for what I want to try? Why can't I just open a single screen that tells me everything I want to know about the one topic I NEED to know with two clicks, and then get back to the action? If anything, seeing all of that when I try to figure out one stat is just going to make me forget what I was trying to accomplish in the first place. It has nothing to do with my intelligence. What it does have to do with is the fact that I can only process so much information at the same time when under stress. Like, say, for instance when playing a video game?

A related effect is the so called "Covert Action" effect. Covert Action was a Sid Meier game released quite a long time ago. Now, it was a fun game, but here's the big problem - the game was divided into several phases. Either you had a screenful of information up, a pretty graphic with a simple choice-picker, were invading a building with bullets flying everywhere and a combat-oriented display, or you were driving trying to arrest someone, or you were in an electronics display trying to override an electrical system.

The biggest problem? When you enter one mode, pretty soon you forget what you were doing in the other mode. When I go to Belgrade in that game and enter the PFO safehouse to break in, I shoot some folks, I hack into computers, and then I stop and stare at the prompt and think... "Wait, what was I doing again? After thinking, doing, and planning so much in THIS mode, I forgot what I was doing overall. Was I trying to find their safehouse in Amsterdam...? No..."

Yes, it worked fine ten years ago, but this is a different type of game. While the combat is similar, it's first person now. You now point and shoot. Things go by faster. It's not the same Fallout, and you know what, I don't care. I don't want the same thing I did in fallout 1 or fallout 2. I want something new.

Bottom line? With the new pacing of the game, information has to be segmented to keep that pace up.

[Virtz]

Why, pray tell, do I need to know any of that when I'm opening my sheet in the middle of combat trying to figure out if I've got a high enough stat for what I want to try?

Looking at the FO stats screen, I can safely say every section features information relevant to combat with the exception of karma and kills parts (which can be replaced by the very relevant perks section). Although I'd never open the character sheet during combat, stats are something I study outside of combat.

Why can't I just open a single screen that tells me everything I want to know about the one topic I NEED to know with two clicks, and then get back to the action?

How about one click instead and you get all the info you could need?

If anything, seeing all of that when I try to figure out one stat is just going to make me forget what I was trying to accomplish in the first place. It has nothing to do with my intelligence. (...)

It's called a short attention span.

The biggest problem? When you enter one mode, pretty soon you forget what you were doing in the other mode. When I go to Belgrade in that game and enter the PFO safehouse to break in, I shoot some folks, I hack into computers, and then I stop and stare at the prompt and think... "Wait, what was I doing again? After thinking, doing, and planning so much in THIS mode, I forgot what I was doing overall. Was I trying to find their safehouse in Amsterdam...? No..."

You're comparing a relatively lengthy infiltration to a look at an informative stats screen? Does this really look like some kind of labyrinth to you?

Yes, it worked fine ten years ago, but this is a different type of game. While the combat is similar, it's first person now. You now point and shoot. Things go by faster. It's not the same Fallout, and you know what, I don't care. I don't want the same thing I did in fallout 1 or fallout 2. I want something new.

Bottom line? With the new pacing of the game, information has to be segmented to keep that pace up.

Yeah, it couldn't possibly work in anything like The Elder Scrolls. Oh wait, shit.

[Fualkner]

Wow, Virtz, it's like you're trying to change our opinions by being overly hostile. Basically, you took a logical post, broke it down, and attacked and nitpicked it to pieces. I'm no master of debate, but I don't think that attacking the little points is a great way to win an overall argument. But that's not even the problem. All we are doing now is bitching at each other instead of over the game. May I suggest we all just agree to disagree and don't bring this up until the game is out?

[Brendan]

I'm no master of debate, but I don't think that attacking the little points is a great way to win an overall argument.

'Little points'? Virtz was replying to the whole post, piece by piece. He's not nitpicking little mistakes, as you prefer to believe, but rather looking at it in segments.

A big screen full of information is...

Well, let me put it to you this way.

If you strapped yourself into an F-16 right now, which has over 200 buttons/switches/controls all labelled with acronyms, and the jet was completely turned off, and you had no idea how to turn it on, would you have any idea where to begin?

And seriously, if FO2's stats screen is too hard for you to understand, how did you ever manage to play Dwarf Fortress?

EDIT: For clarification.

[Tormy]

I think they should have called it "Fallout 1b: A game set in the fallout universe but is not necessarily related to the original but we'd like to cash in on the name"

Other than that it looks good and I can’t wait to try it.

Also, anyone who complains that the interface is lacking or requires two many clicks YOUR ON A FORUM DISCUSSING DWARF FORTRESS FOR CHRIST SAKES

Ive seen some new ingame videos...I gotta say that I agree with you. I didnt wanted to buy this game, since its quite different compared to the old FO games, but man, it looks good, so Im gonna buy it.

[Fualkner]

And seriously, if FO2's stats screen is too hard for you to understand, how did you ever manage to play Dwarf Fortress?

Right there. Right. There. That's what I'm talking about. You are bashing me now, instead of the game itself. I never said that the stat screens are good, awful, too hard to understand, anything like that. Now all you are doing is questioning my intelligence. That is not how you have an intelligent discussion.

[Brendan]

And seriously, if FO2's stats screen is too hard for you to understand, how did you ever manage to play Dwarf Fortress?

Right there. Right. There. That's what I'm talking about. You are bashing me now, instead of the game itself. I never said that the stat screens are good, awful, too hard to understand, anything like that. Now all you are doing is questioning my intelligence. That is not how you have an intelligent discussion.

That comment wasn't directed at you, specifically; I suppose I should have included the following quote to point out what I was responding to...

A big screen full of information is...

Well, let me put it to you this way.

If you strapped yourself into an F-16 right now, which has over 200 buttons/switches/controls all labelled with acronyms, and the jet was completely turned off, and you had no idea how to turn it on, would you have any idea where to begin?

[Pnx]

Errr the reason they segmented it all is because it's coming out on a console, they did the same thing with oblivion, they just get lazy and don't change anything for the PC and you have to maneuver through a menu designed for a controller. It gets very irritating when you're using a mouse to navigate a system that wants it to be the flicks of a analog stick.

[Ioric Kittencuddler]

With TVs these days they could have easily put everything on one page just like Black Isle did in Fallout 1 ten years ago.  All they needed to do was make it have a sticky cursor like in Rogue Galaxy's special ability screen.  Most of the screen is taken up by useless aesthetics anyway.  I'm going to need you to explain why it is that a modern console can't display a character sheet like Fallout 1 had.

[McDoomhammer]

Telling you how you come across does not equal twisting your words, kthx.  You're still coming across that way- tabs, ohthehorror.

Yes, that is the most reasonable conclusion you could reach given the facts that I have repeatedly pointed out the game's flaws and stated my reasons for disliking it.  I just *want* to hate it.

Actually, yes, it is.  I'm not going to get all armchair psychiatrist about why that might be, but you are channeling all sorts of energy into insisting, based on a few minutes' movie and some images, that a game that no-one has played yet because it's not out will suck.  Right down to, yes, the menu system.  The 'flaws' you point out are in the main part either non-specific, petty, or speculation (in contrast to others who are of sceptical position but capable of citing concrete and reasonable reasons) and generally hard to make out anyway because you flat-out refuse to even entertain the possibility that it might be worth playing.  And yet it's totally worth the hours you've spent telling us how awful it cannot help but be.
Admittedly some of that is just your usual mode of arguing, but even so, that sort of behaviour doesn't come from a detached viewpoint.  Whether you realise it or not, you are determined not to like it.

[Ioric Kittencuddler]

Telling you how you come across does not equal twisting your words, kthx.  You're still coming across that way- tabs, ohthehorror.

Yes, that is the most reasonable conclusion you could reach given the facts that I have repeatedly pointed out the game's flaws and stated my reasons for disliking it.  I just *want* to hate it.

Actually, yes, it is.  I'm not going to get all armchair psychiatrist about why that might be, but you are channeling all sorts of energy into insisting, based on a few minutes' movie and some images, that a game that no-one has played yet because it's not out will suck.  Right down to, yes, the menu system.  The 'flaws' you point out are in the main part either non-specific, petty, or speculation (in contrast to others who are of sceptical position but capable of citing concrete and reasonable reasons) and generally hard to make out anyway because you flat-out refuse to even entertain the possibility that it might be worth playing.  And yet it's totally worth the hours you've spent telling us how awful it cannot help but be.
Admittedly some of that is just your usual mode of arguing, but even so, that sort of behaviour doesn't come from a detached viewpoint.  Whether you realise it or not, you are determined not to like it.

The first part of your post sums up your argument perfectly.  You don't actually care about the argument, all you care about is making me look wrong.

You say you're "not going to get all armchair psychiatrist" but by the end of the post you're telling me how I am thinking, and that that is how I am thinking whether I realize it or not.  You concentrated on one sentence of my post and based a whole argument about everything I've posted on that one sentence without even giving any evidence to support your theories.  You just plain lie when you say that I am basing my entire argument on "a few minutes' movie and some images" when in fact I am basing them on several minutes of gameplay footage, many images, interviews, press releases, hands on previews, and the developer's past track record, comparing their previous works to what we know of this new one and have stated as much.

With a little bit of editing I could use your post as a template to "prove" that:  "Whether you realize it or not, you are determined to like it."

[McDoomhammer]

The first part of your post sums up your argument perfectly.  You don't actually care about the argument, all you care about is making me look wrong.

You say you're "not going to get all armchair psychiatrist" but by the end of the post you're telling me how I am thinking, and that that is how I am thinking whether I realize it or not.  You concentrated on one sentence of my post and based a whole argument about everything I've posted on that one sentence without even giving any evidence to support your theories.  You just plain lie when you say that I am basing my entire argument on "a few minutes' movie and some images" when in fact I am basing them on several minutes of gameplay footage, many images, interviews, press releases, hands on previews, and the developer's past track record, comparing their previous works to what we know of this new one and have stated as much.

Lie?  Understatement at best.  The only thing I left out is other people's second hand opinions.

The first part of your post sums up your argument perfectly.  You don't actually care about the argument, all you care about is making me look wrong.

To the first part- if by 'the argument' you mean 'whether F3 will suck', of course I don't care about that.  It's not out yet, getting heated about it is ridiculous.  It's pure speculation, so debating the points is worth precisely squat.  If I want to know that badly I might buy the game when it comes out and decide if I like it.  I have no need to convince others ahead of time that my opinion of it is 'correct'.  I don't have an opinion.  It's not out yet.
To the second, that pretty much says it all, doesn't it?  It's all about you.

With a little bit of editing I could use your post as a template to "prove" that:  "Whether you realize it or not, you are determined to like it."

  Okay, go ahead.

[Jetman123]

And seriously, if FO2's stats screen is too hard for you to understand, how did you ever manage to play Dwarf Fortress?

Because fallout 2 was a differently paced game than fallout 3. Just as with Dwarf Fortress you have time and room for error and trial and experiment until you get the game. Whereas in Fallout 3, it looks like it's shaping up to be that if you use the menu in combat it has to be fast, streamlined and efficient.

Don't get me wrong - this is all my first impression and I certainly could be wrong.

As for the covert action effect, I mentioned that as a related effect. The entire game is focused around highly, highly, highly segmented game modes. You can spend five minutes in combat and then end up driving and just think "Wait, WTF, who am I supposed to be chasing again?" In a think-fast game - which FO3 seems to me to be shaping up to be - you can't have irrelevant information to the task at hand displayed all at once with the relevant data. That just ends up in confusion. To avoid that sort of effect happening, you have to have a streamlined, integrated display that you can bring up and instantly get a single topic of information up in front of you - and only that topic.

Again, do not get me wrong. Do not misunderstand. I understood Fallout 2's interface fine. Fallout 2's interface was fine - for Fallout 2. This is Fallout 3. Again, different game. Different pacing. Different methods. If you try to use the same methods on a different game, they aren't going to work.

Is Fallout 3 going in the right direction for the series? I'm honestly not sure anymore. It's no longer the point I'm trying to make. All I'm saying is that you shouldn't dismiss the interface just yet.

All I know right now is that I plan to save any further opinion on whether it is a worthy sequel until I play the game.

By the way, if you want to see what I'm talking about, go download DosBox, and then download Sid Meier's Covert Action from Home of the Underdogs. (Google 'em.) It's a fun game, but the interface is sorely lacking simply because you can't focus on the information you need for the current task in the middle of said task. Or outside a mode at all, really - all you can get is a bunch of data every time, leaving you with a few minutes to scratch your head and seperate the pertinent data from the irrelevant. You can't call up said information in the middle of a task. You can only call it up when you're in the overview, meaning playing with a piece of paper and a pencil or a good memory is essential to remembering what you're doing once you're finally into that computer system and trying to figure out what you were supposed to search for.