"Deconstructing Vats" by Cimmerian Nights

[SenisterDenister]

This is another case of rose tinted glasses syndrome.

And that is where you lose all legitimacy in your argument.

[Kickstand27]

ironic

[kassikas]

This is another case of rose tinted glasses syndrome.

And that is where you lose all legitimacy in your argument.

I am sorry if you feel that way, but revisionism isn't a valid argument. The Fallout series pushed you into several non-choices in order to move the plot along long before Fallout Three came along. If one wishes to hold that against the entire series, that is fair. To use it as a difference between 1&2 and 3 is plain revisionism.

Perhaps you and I have very different meanings of the word credibility if rejecting an obvious double standard diminishes my credibility in your eyes.

[Yonmanc]

Oh for fucks sake. Why can't idiots just die, I don't need this today.

[Kickstand27]

Oh for fucks sake. Why can't idiots just die, I don't need this today.

why not do us all a favor and lead by example

[kassikas]

Ahh, this is that kind of forum.

Well, have fun guys, sorry to bother.

[Yonmanc]

Oh for fucks sake. Why can't idiots just die, I don't need this today.

why not do us all a favor and lead by example

That is EXACTLY the type of metality I'm talking about. It wasn't even aimed at you, but oh boy, you just gotsta jump in. Dude, seriously, Get. A. Girlfriend.

Or a hobby or something.

I'm tired of dumbasses wherever I go, can I not just go somwhere without hearing:

A ) A dumb idea

B ) An attempt to one up on someone

For fucks's sake Kick, just hang yourself, you're worthless

[Kickstand27]

*melodramatic grumbling and reading way to much into what people say on a forum*

who brought me up the other day?
come on, your posts contribute 0 value other than trying to inflame people. i am just returning the favor.


cheers

[cazsim83]

Whiteblood wrote - Part of me thinks this reviewer/newsguy was paid off by some uppity moral organization to cry out against violence, and well, cry he did. Like a bitch. Given, I might be biased cause my character used Small Guns predominantly, but in that aspect, things where PLAYING THE DAMN GAME rewarded your probability of landing a shot, something that is quite realistic, since if you shoot guns a lot, presumably, you'll know how to make a shot land right. As well, a number of those bugs, when they're far off, are quite hard to land a shot on, and it's specially frustrating when one last stinger sends you into the nuclear afterlife kicking and screaming. But wait, how about a system that evaluates the amount of effort and time we've dumped into honing a skill, and pits that against an enemy's, for lack of a better term, AC? It's lovely! Plus, it's not like you can use it for every enemy you come across and the feat that comes the closest to that, Grim Reaper Sprint I think, is upon reaching level 20, so relying on VATS is a very bad idea unless you love to snipe, and you can stay FAR away from Old Olney. Untimately, what's so bad about a few laughs now and again? We've all had kills we would love to watch in slow motion, and VATS is just that; it's that dirty sleazy ex of yours who loves to play rough and when you're satisfied, you can call your obnoxious man friends to drive hew off until the next lonely night.

LOL @ Wall of text, first off.

Second - LOL @ anyone at DaC being paid for anything.

Third - LOL @ awful grammar and spelling errors.

Fourth - (as an aside) LOL @ "This is that kind of forum". Thank the baby Jesus it is, and that people like whatever-his-name-was aren't here, as well as idiots like Whitepower or w/e my dearly quoted's name is.

Fifth and Final - I was looking for some sort of general game forum to be a part of, but The Escapist will definitely not be it, after reading some of the outright idiocy of it's popular members. (As evidenced above)

---

All in all, I think the response to your editorial, Cimmerian, proves what much of the gaming community is like, and perhaps always has been like. Bethesda is a *great* company, and I mean that in all sincerity. Their shareholders and anyone who partakes of their success financially is, I am sure, completely satisfied with their endeavors. As a business, they are fantastic - as the owners of the Fallout franchise, they are shit, at least to those of us who appreciated, for a number of reasons, the originals.

[Yonmanc]

I brought you up in a playful jab, you're clinging to that like an aids victim to a miracle cure.

Are you really that lonely?

[Kickstand27]

I brought you up in a playful jab, you're clinging to that like an aids victim to a miracle cure.

Are you really that lonely?

ah yes, mentioning it once is clinging to it.


btw, what am i doing on here besides dispensing playfuyl jabs?
see also: you reading way too much into what people post.
er, i eman please take me compleely sriously.
internets and vidja games are super serious business.
ie:lighten up , francis


kassikas made some pretty valid points. but lets do throw the baby out witht he bathwater

[Yonmanc]

avasdbhabhxahdhbxwbxmsekxfcmdkexfmcxdkfsqkgeqlwhregmcdwewqcdfwrjcmdwgjcmdkmegcjmdre fmwfcqekrmdekfwravasdbhabhxahdhbxwbxmsekxfcmdkexfmcxdkfsqkgeqlwhregmcdwewqcdfwrjcmdwgjcmdkmegcjmdre fmwfcqekrmdekfwravasdbhabhxahdhbxwbxmsekxfcmdkexfmcxdkfsqkgeqlwhregmcdwewqcdfwrjcmdwgjcmdkmegcjmdre fmwfcqekrmdekfwravasdbhabhxahdhbxwbxmsekxfcmdkexfmcxdkfsqkgeqlwhregmcdwewqcdfwrjcmdwgjcmdkmegcjmdre fmwfcqekrmdekfwravasdbhabhxahdhbxwbxmsekxfcmdkexfmcxdkfsqkgeqlwhregmcdwewqcdfwrjcmdwgjcmdkmegcjmdre fmwfcqekrmdekfwravasdbhabhxahdhbxwbxmsekxfcmdkexfmcxdkfsqkgeqlwhregmcdwewqcdfwrjcmdwgjcmdkmegcjmdre fmwfcqekrmdekfwravasdbhabhxahdhbxwbxmsekxfcmdkexfmcxdkfsqkgeqlwhregmcdwewqcdfwrjcmdwgjcmdkmegcjmdre fmwfcqekrmdekfwravasdbhabhxahdhbxwbxmsekxfcmdkexfmcxdkfsqkgeqlwhregmcdwewqcdfwrjcmdwgjcmdkmegcjmdre fmwfcqekrmdekfwravasdbhabhxahdhbxwbxmsekxfcmdkexfmcxdkfsqkgeqlwhregmcdwewqcdfwrjcmdwgjcmdkmegcjmdre fmwfcqekrmdekfwravasdbhabhxahdhbxwbxmsekxfcmdkexfmcxdkfsqkgeqlwhregmcdwewqcdfwrjcmdwgjcmdkmegcjmdre fmwfcqekrmdekfwr

Dog Rape

[SenisterDenister]

Quit derailing threads with your bullshit. All of you.

[cazsim83]

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You can edit your posts in this forum
You can delete your posts in this forum
You can vote in polls in this forum

---

@ CN - VATS wasn't evolution at all, it was a step backwards. How is VATS evolution? What's been built off of it? Do you see other companies adapting to VATS? It's an ill-conceived gimmick meant to pander to the LCD. How is it going to stand up, it had to be nerfed to make it playable.

You wrote this on TheEsc. forums.

Do you mean like "Bullet Time" or any countless other games like Max Payne who use it, or are you specifically, literally talking about VATS? If you mean anything like bullet time, I think that Bethesda just ripped off BT combat, put some green paintbrush strokes in, and called it VATS.

[TwinkieGorilla]

To use it as a difference between 1&2 and 3 is plain revisionism.

no need. 1 & 2 were great post-apocalyptic cRPG games. 3 is a decent, albeit misguided, attempt at mimicking a great post-apocalyptic cRPG game. that's really as complex as it needs to get. no revisionism or non-revisionist theories need apply.

do pass go, do collect $200, do come again.

[Grubnar]

. . .

...

Don't worry about this article being relative to only one problem of Fallout 3; as of yesterday, the expansive article addressing all of Fallout 3's problems was put back into production.

I am curious, what is this "expansive article" you mention?

- Grubnar

[TwinkieGorilla]

Joined: 11 May 2007
Posts: 2

lol, wtf?

[St. Toxic]

I have been a Fallout Fangirl for almost a decade and a half.

And that is where you lose all legitimacy in your argument.

Fixed.

A: If you don't like vats don't use it. The game is perfectly playable without it. In fact, I personally only use vats in emergencies.

Nobody is complaining about there being cheats in the game; that's all fair and good. It's when you bundle aimed shots, instant replay and god-mode and try to sell it off as an actual game-play addition that it gets a bit ridiculous, at least to the point where it's reasonable for consumers to call the company on it. When on top of that you have people clamouring to the idea of it being a tactical master-stroke, or that it's some sort of bridge between real-time and turn-based combat, anybody sans a frontal lobotomy is entitled to laugh as they cry.

You're welcome to enjoy it and nobody can take that away from you, so long as you understand that if it was a decent system, you wouldn't be making excuses for it. Leave the PR to Bethesda, it's not like they need your help in that department.

Also to note, on your way out:

Also, to me, this article isn't so much about VATS as it illustrates the design philosophy of appealing to the lowest common denominator prevalent throughout Fallout 3.

It's evident, by what the developers themselves have said, that VATS is a tacked on instant replay mode first and foremost. If that idea unsettles you, take it up with Beth, but any redeeming qualities that VATS may or may not have are either the product of chance or an over-active imagination. While the turn-based combat of Fallout 1 & 2 may not be the Holy Grail of tactical simulation, it is designed primarily as a combat system and performs to that end beautifully.

Fallout isn't a turn based game anymore, and while I would love to see a 'Classic Fallout' release for twenty bucks on the virtual console that was strictly 100% top down turn based campy gold it really isn't possible to produce such a game with today's technology and expect it to sell for sixty bucks a pop.

If you would actually love to see a "Classic Fallout", I sincerely doubt you'd worry more about the potential profit on such a title than its existence en all. If you hadn't noticed, this point is addressed every time somebody says,

it illustrates the design philosophy of appealing to the lowest common denominator prevalent throughout Fallout 3.

as with most of us being adults, we fully understand how streamlining boosts sales. Nobody is questioning that. We're saying the title got steam-rolled in order to maximize on profits, and though it's a point oft debated by you clueless dolts, you never fail to bring up how unprofitable an actual Fallout title would be, which essentially proves it.

Here's the deal; None of us gets a slice of the pie, hence nobody gives a shit. All that this extra money does is further allow Beth to buy up franchises, flatten them out in order to attract clueless jackasses and maximize profits and carry on to the next victim IP and so forth.

Nobody in their right mind is going to loose sleep over that paradoxical buttfuck, so naturally I'm curious as to why you give a shit. Would it be that much worse if Beth managed to release the first "good" game they've done since Daggerfall, albeit possibly suffering for it economically, than continuously releasing watered down garbage until cast to the side, probably by a more risk-willing studio, due to their creative stagnation, the way we've seen it happen countless times before? Or, the less optimistic approach, get squashed by another company doing the same fucking thing.

That means if company wants to slip turned based elements into a triple A title those elements have to combine with a real time engine to form a hybrid. The end result is vats.

The end result is crap. Don't tell me you actually buy that shit.

That said, are we really talking about combat on a diehard old school Fallout fan forum, and using one optional combat element to argue what is wrong with a game?

No, not really. It's just that VATS sums up what's wrong with Fallout 3 pretty nicely. The arguments used to be point-by-point, but most FO3 enthusiasts seem adverse to reading, so it's imperative to keep it short in order to bridge the intellectual gap.

Also, to me, this article isn't so much about VATS as it illustrates the design philosophy of appealing to the lowest common denominator prevalent throughout Fallout 3.

even I have to concede that Fallout combat is hit or miss at best, and usually packed to the rafters with bugs, glitches, terrible game play mechanics (See companions) and frustration.

Plenty of people out there couldn't play FO3 at all out of the box, with the PS3 version being altogether unfinishable as a direct result. If you got turned off by bugs in the first two games, I'm surprised you persevered with 3.

As for the rest, I've heard few complaints other than the combat being too slow, getting shot in the back by Ian and general "I didn't get it, so I got killed by a rat." type of dumbfuckery. To that end, there's a speed setting and there are sedatives you can take for your ADD, there is such a thing as innocent bystanders and anybody who'd call chess a broken system because they suck at it should be forcefully removed from existence. That's not to say that you're not allowed to lose, but if losing is a problem for you, that maybe indicates you should stop playing games altogether.

In one notable case, an individual is forced to lock up party members for their on good. Rather then being an asset, your raggedy companion is an accidental liability.

I'd be more pissed off if they didn't shoot me in the back from time to time. Since when did we become so afraid of consequences that we've resorted to calling them "glitches"? I've certainly managed to blow Ian to pieces on numerous occasions due to lapses in judgement, but him doing the same to me is somehow not what God intended eh?

When playing a non-combat oriented character, the companions can be an excellent resource for combat encounters. That's obviously not to say that they're perfect, but they may well be better than you are in that specific instance. Sometimes they do stupid shit, but so do you, as do hostile NPC's, the only problem here being how people are gridlocked into thinking they're owed some kind of special treatment.

I think people harp on Fallout 3's writing unfairly.

I'm looking for this middle-aged guy, have you seen him?

Yes the main story is kind of silly, but again that is sort of a trend in Fallout games. Fallout is about the wasteland and the encounters you have within it.

Fallout is certainly more than a linear trek from point A to B, though the same cannot be said about Fallout 3 in regards to the main story. That shit was so linear it actually broke if you didn't stay the course. Imagine just stumbling over Master while exploring the wasteland and getting stuck because you haven't visited some quest-specific location -- I know I can't.

As for the quality of the actual writing, it's no surprise that people fellate Fo3. At this very moment there's bound to be at least a few thousand dickheads jerking off to Final Fantasy fanfic.

Yeah, there are a lot of nits to pick with Fallout 3. I was deeply unimpressed with what they did to super mutants but that is no reason to jump on the “Fallout 3 is the suck� bandwagon. There is a lot of Classic Fallout in Fallout 3.

It's not like I have my head up my ass full-time or anything. You're welcome to direct me to some footage of "Classic Fallout" cameo appearances in Fallout 3, because I've certainly looked for myself and I sure as hell didn't find any. Though, any game in which you actually have to scavenge for gems among the turds, hardly inspires confidence to look further.

I loved Dogmeat to bits and pieces, but to me he wasn't a stalwart companion that stood between me and my enemies, he was a lovable role playing opportunity I desperately tried to protect as he launched himself at enemies and entropy he could not withstand.

Oddly enough, he was the exact opposite for me. This, coupled with your arguments on why nerfing SPECIAL shouldn't be a big deal seems to read as incomprehension or ignorance to the different play-styles and character builds present in Fallout 1 / 2. The scale of the world in Fallout isn't limited to space and objects, but also encompasses the different approaches the player could have to gameplay elements and story progression, and is one of the core reasons for why these games are popular to this very day. Some people seemingly still don't get that, Obsidian included.

I think this has more to do with rose tinted glasses then clear objective difference. You can kill 99.9% of the population of the DC wastes, if not more, which is roughly the same percentage of the people you could kill in Fallout 2, at least for gamers everywhere but the US, and if I remember right child killing got patched out of Fallout 2 in the US.

Children were cut out completely in some countries, but no npc was truly invulnerable. The most important and obvious aspect involves being able to kill characters vital to the main storyline, which simply isn't the case with FO3. Maybe it's time to revisit those old games, as you seemingly wear those rose tinted glasses with more pride than anyone present, albeit the wrong way around.

In Fallout 1&2 you had to use your imagination to fill in most of the role playing blanks. While this is still the case in 3, you have to use a lot less of it.

I've heard the same argument the other way around from Fallout 3 fans, but that's hardly your fault. What about the dialogues, though? Because, personally, when my character says "I want to buy" my imagination-o-meter breaks down. I'd say role-playing in FO3 requires an over-active imagination, in other words LARP. It's fine if you got what it takes, usually being 6-12 years old is more than enough.

I honestly don't know about stealing. Stealing required too much saving and reloading for me, which I am against.

The same way I never used laser weapons, because I always missed. Oh hang on, you could just raise the skill. My bad.

Ahh, this is that kind of forum.

Well, have fun guys, sorry to bother.

Seems this delicate flower is a stranger to the mysterious ways of the BBS. We fight the good fight with our voice, and dont afraid of anything.

Overall, same old rehashed shit. A for effort, and steel be with you.

[Cimmerian Nights]

I am not sure what to make of this argument. First, companions were usually a detriment in the combat of Fallout 1&2. I loved Dogmeat to bits and pieces, but to me he wasn't a stalwart companion that stood between me and my enemies, he was a lovable role playing opportunity I desperately tried to protect as he launched himself at enemies and entropy he could not withstand.

Your issue here is with poor implementation of companion AI, that's a different issue, and universally recognize as a comical shortcoming of Fallout. When a stat like CH is predicated on offering certain advantages and disadvantages, and when those are removed it reduces it's effectiveness and imbalances SPECIAL. When you chose your stats and skills, you should be forced to deal with the inherent strengths and weaknesses of the character you build, and the world should reflect that. When stats and skills have fewer and fewer applications, they become less and less integral as the game moves ever closer to FPS-ness.

SPECIAL and the derived skills left room for improvement. So didn't Fallout 1's really shallow TB combat, but Bethesda threw the baby out with the bathwater by scrapping it all and using Oblivion as it's starting point.

They didn't try to improve Fallout, they tried to improve upon Oblivion.

I also think you are focusing way to much on the nuts and bolts game play mechanics. I have difficulty wrapping my head around the claim that SPECIAL made Fallout special, particularly in a thread who's OP featured the quote:

My idea is to explore more of the world and more of the ethics of a postnuclear world, not to make a better plasma gun.

Well, that wasn't the only quote (in it's context it's clearly meant to distinguish the Fallout 1& 2 approach to design versus that of Todd Howard), this one in my mind is the most important:

Paper and pencil role-playing games were the single biggest influence [of Fallout]. We had a goal of trying to recreate the tabletop gaming experience as best as possible. For the most part, I think we succeeded.

Before the post-apocalyptic world was even drawn up, the whole idea sprang from the idea of making a GURPS cRPG.

It really goes beyond the nuts and bolts. The nuts and bolts only facilitate the fundamentals on an RPG - Choice and consequence, Focus on character skill over player skill, a world that reacts to the decisions you make, having a predefined set of rules rather than giving everyone the ability to be tops in every skill, in every stat, in every faction. Those topics deserve a thread all their own.
I take for granted we all know that, but I didn't realize who all would be the audience for this.

When you spend millions of dollars on graphical assets, voice actors, programmers and marketing, but fail to surpass a 13 year old game in story, writing, interface, combat and atmosphere, your company has issues.

But deep down, Bethesda wants to make a sustainable RPG that stands the test of time like ACDelco wants to make brake pads that last forever. How are they going to keep the revenue streams flowing like that? The product lifecycle ends when they're done whoring the DLC and the horse armor.

They burned off the Daggerfall fans with MW, then they burned the MW fans off with Oblivion. Then they burned the FO fans off with F03. Bethesda are like pedophiles, once their audience hits puberty they lose interest in them. They're already looking for the next clueless group of konsole kiddies to shill their overhyped generic shit to.

All in all, I think the response to your editorial, Cimmerian, proves what much of the gaming community is like, and perhaps always has been like.

You know I thought that thread was fairly balanced, plenty of people arguing both sides. The people who got their sensibilities offended were the type that Bethesda panders to, and their arguments speak for themselves. I would expect those notions to be as popular with them as Ted Nugent at a PETA convention.

@ CN - VATS wasn't evolution at all, it was a step backwards. How is VATS evolution? What's been built off of it? Do you see other companies adapting to VATS? It's an ill-conceived gimmick meant to pander to the LCD. How is it going to stand up, it had to be nerfed to make it playable.

You wrote this on TheEsc. forums.

Do you mean like "Bullet Time" or any countless other games like Max Payne who use it, or are you specifically, literally talking about VATS? If you mean anything like bullet time, I think that Bethesda just ripped off BT combat, put some green paintbrush strokes in, and called it VATS.

Evolution to me implies a few things.
-Something is innovative and distinguishes itself from the stagnant pack
-the innovation must be viable. It must stand on it's own and prove the test of time without needing to be propped up.
-it will probably be copied and adapted by others, and improved upon in the continued effort to improve and survive

I don't see how VATS fulfills any of that. For someone to say it's innovative only tells me they really take the bullshit that Pete Hines spews at face value. VATS was never seen in a Fallout game before, but to call it evolution is clueless.

[cazsim83]

I liken VATS to the karma points (?) in Arcanum where you could force a good reaction from time to time, except VATS you can use whenever you want just about, and it's only combat, and you can only use guns....

Now that I think about it it's nothing like the points in Arcanum.