Sightseeing in Fallout: New Vegas

[Frater Perdurabo]

I disagree. It is how well the job has been done that matters; a well-made isometric 2d world will look better than a poorly made 3d world. I'm not saying that this is necessarily the relation between FO and FO3, but the fact of the matter is that FO's world was very well made, whereas the developers could have done a far better job with FO3.
Ah: noticed the well-done provision. However, I didn't expect a well-done world from Bethesda and I'm not expecting one from Obsidian either. Nevertheless, I am convinced that NV will be better than FO3, merely because I believe that the standards set are so low that only a group of apes could possibly do a worse job.

[Yonmanc]

i am all for nostalgia, but 2-d isometrics arent better looking than well done 3-d...

But they are better than Bethesda 3D.

This is the problem with the industry, it's that consumers think that "well done" 3D is better than well done 2D isometric. It isn't. The whole point of video game graphics is to project the game world the best they can. They set the mood, the feel, and also, when very well done, represent how the player should feel about what they are doing.

In the original Fallouts, the 2D isometric view made me (personally, feel free to agree/disagree) feel as though I was looking in on this horrible world, watching from afar as these people fuck each other over, make big descisions etc. I was looking in on the struggles. It also added to the scope of things. They felt like big stories, and with the 2D isometric view, you were given a unique perspective into every fine detail. When decker asked me to kill Jain, I walk in the church. In one view, I can see the doctor on the alter, next to him his guard. The doctor is looking over some of patients on the floor whilst the guard is just quietly watching. And then by the door there is a child, offering flowers. A bunch of different things happening at once. It made a simple set up actually feel immersive, I wasn't the only one there, and no matter what I did, it would effect the small ecosystem within that one room.

Fallout 3's graphics were hailed a huge success, and they didn't do shit for the setting. The color tones were all wrong, both camera choices failed to utilise the surroundings (even panning out in 3rd person was a disaster). And the high-end graphics also showed us the things that were clearly not happening that should have. People wern't reacting naturally to their events and surroundings, you could get a close look at unfinished items (like half a moutainside missing, guess I wasn't supposed to be able to get there).

The looks were very important to the Fallout setting, and the 2D isometric view was perfect for that game.

[jimmypneumatic]

Fallout did more with less, that's why it's a classic.

[Kickstand27]

i am all for nostalgia, but 2-d isometrics arent better looking than well done 3-d...

But they are better than Bethesda 3D.

This is the problem with the industry, it's that consumers think that "well done" 3D is better than well done 2D isometric. It isn't. The whole point of video game graphics is to project the game world the best they can. They set the mood, the feel, and also, when very well done, represent how the player should feel about what they are doing.

In the original Fallouts, the 2D isometric view made me (personally, feel free to agree/disagree) feel as though I was looking in on this horrible world, watching from afar as these people fuck each other over, make big descisions etc. I was looking in on the struggles. It also added to the scope of things. They felt like big stories, and with the 2D isometric view, you were given a unique perspective into every fine detail. When decker asked me to kill Jain, I walk in the church. In one view, I can see the doctor on the alter, next to him his guard. The doctor is looking over some of patients on the floor whilst the guard is just quietly watching. And then by the door there is a child, offering flowers. A bunch of different things happening at once. It made a simple set up actually feel immersive, I wasn't the only one there, and no matter what I did, it would effect the small ecosystem within that one room.

Fallout 3's graphics were hailed a huge success, and they didn't do shit for the setting. The color tones were all wrong, both camera choices failed to utilise the surroundings (even panning out in 3rd person was a disaster). And the high-end graphics also showed us the things that were clearly not happening that should have. People wern't reacting naturally to their events and surroundings, you could get a close look at unfinished items (like half a moutainside missing, guess I wasn't supposed to be able to get there).

The looks were very important to the Fallout setting, and the 2D isometric view was perfect for that game.

this is why i said well done in italics. i wasnt necessarily referring to fallouts graphics. not fallout 1 comprared to three. only the capabilities of 2d compared to 3d. in my opinion a really good job of 3d will be better..
take half life for instance.. they arent the best 3-d graphics by todays standards.. but for their time, when you first merge the worlds and youve got the face huggers jumping at you. i catually jumped, because with a 3-d first person perspective, it actually looked like it was juming at me. when i looked around a room, it actually looked like i was looking around a room. if a mood is done right, it shoudlnt matter if it is 2-d or 3-d, i agree. but another thing that 3-d had: i ddint have to try and click in "hidden" areas because a structure was obstructing most of my view as weth 2-d iso's.
no one argues a good game is a good game or even that fallout 3 shold have been more fitting to the presentation of its predescessors.. i loved toe jam and earl as 2-d isometric and wouldnt change it to 3-d to for anything, so i understand the fallout 1/2/t vs 3's plasticy looking 3-d, for sure.. but well done 3-d? thats a thing to behold, IMHO

[jimmypneumatic]

3d doesn't mean it has to be a first person perspective though. I think they were on the right track with Van Buren, a 3d isometric view.

[Kickstand27]

3d doesn't mean it has to be a first person perspective though. I think they were on the right track with Van Buren, a 3d isometric view.

this is also true..

rotating iso's were a great idea too

[Redeye]

So, how about that dinosaur location?

Cabazon Dinosaurs is such a funny place to hide a secret underground base.

"# During the 1980s he served as the Director of Research for a joint venture between the Wackenhut Corporation of Coral Gables, Florida, and the Cabazon Band of Indians of Indio, California. The joint venture was located on the Cabazon reservation.

# The Wackenhut-Cabazon joint venture sought to develop and/or manufacture certain materials that are used in military and national security operations, including night vision goggles, machine guns, fuel-air explosives, and biological and chemical warfare weapons.
.

I wonder of the devs did their Cabazon research and filled the location with remnants of old conspiracies.

(An NCR quest to "get the electronic parts from the Vault" ala FO2)

And so on...